Israel / Palestine News Thread

[Raze]

Just now, Nivsch said:

Don't wonder later when Israelis put all Palestinians in one box. Look how language distorts the mind.

They aren't "liberal zionists" they are just Israeli normal people, like normal American people and like Spanish normal people.

They aren't any less Liberal than Liberal Americans.

They are Israeli people who are liberal zionists. The messianic zionists are also Israeli people.

They are less liberal then liberal Americans because they by and large support the occupation of Palestinians without giving them equal rights. 

[Nivsch]

9 minutes ago, Raze said:

They are less liberal then liberal Americans because they by and large support the occupation of Palestinians without giving them equal rights. 

Most people aren't knowledgable in this issue and think in terms of security and thats it. As well as me before this war. 

You also can't expect caring from people who suffer 30 years of terror attacks coming from your side's extremists.

In this reality, the Liberal values will naturally be invested in other topics like LGBTQ, Veganism, Women rights etc. This is natural and understandable. Your side has gained the distrust Israelis feel towards you. 

Edited December 28, 2024 by Nivsch

[Breakingthewall]

18 minutes ago, Raze said:

Iran can already make nukes in a week if it wanted to. Bombing them will just send them deeper underground to make them.

Other Arab states are currently not direct enemies of Israel.

They could also just get them from another country like Russia or North Korea.

Even if they didn’t get nukes large missiles pose enough of a threat to require the Samson option if there is a full scale war.

Israel now is showing that if it's attacked it will respond extremely hard, then at the end this is the only wise strategy for Israel, being weak now means war in the future, showing extreme harshness now could make anyone think in if really want that fight. What else to do? Abandon Israel would be the only other option.

Edited December 28, 2024 by Breakingthewall

[Raze]

2 minutes ago, Nivsch said:

Most people aren't knowledgable in this issue and think in terms of security and thats it. As well as me before this war. 

You also can't expect caring from people who suffer 30 years of terror attacks coming from your side's extremists.

In this reality, the Liberal values will naturally be invested in other topics like LGBTQ, Veganism, Women rights etc. This is natural and understandable. Your side has gained the distrust Israelis feel towards you. 

Terror attacks were a response to the occupation.

The security situation only worsened as the occupation worsened.

The global left is rejecting the Israeli left for apartheid. 

[Nivsch]

6 minutes ago, Raze said:

Terror attacks were a response to the occupation.

The security situation only worsened as the occupation worsened.

The global left is rejecting the Israeli left for apartheid. 

But also the occupation has worsened a lot because the terror has worsened.

50% Of Israelis wanted Two State solution before the Palestinians decided to ruin this too.

Edited December 28, 2024 by Nivsch

[Raze]

1 minute ago, Breakingthewall said:

Israel now is showing that if it's attacked it will respond extremely hard, then at the end this is the only wise strategy for Israel, being weak now means war in the future, showing extreme harshness now could make anyone think in if really want that fight. What else to do? Abandon Israel would be the only other option.

Large responses don’t increase security. For example in 1982 they invaded Lebanon in a large response for security, but after sabra and shatila the shias turned against them and their security got worse. 

They did many large responses in Gaza such as 2008, 2014, and 2018, yet that just lead to Oct 7.

Iran didn’t attack israel, yet israel struck their embassy in Syria to assassinate their general, Iran responded by sending a small strike with advanced warning that was intercepted and said the issue is over and they won’t continue, israel then bombed the capital of Iran. That’s not responding, it’s escalating.

Regardless most security analysts say israel can’t destroy irans nuclear capabilities, at best it delays them but they will just move further underground and make them.

Iran has offered deals to not make nukes multiple times and was rejected by Israel, and they still haven’t made nukes, so they could try engaging with those. 

[Raze]

4 minutes ago, Nivsch said:

And the occupation worsened because of the terror worsened.

50% Of the Israel wanted two state solution before the Palestinians decided to ruin this too.

- Prior to the first intifada the population was so passive to the constant abuse that israel barely used anyone to guard it, when they finally reacted in the first intifada israel responded with mass violence, that is when Hamas was formed and when the terror increase. That’s like saying if I am beating you and you hit me back if I start stabbing you it’s your fault.

https://btselem.org/statistics/first_intifada_tables

These are the casualties of the first intifada, note the amount of Israelis killed by Palestinians in the first and second year compared to the amount of Palestinians killed.

- Then why are there hundreds of thousands of settlers in the west bank if they want to give it back? And the settlements increased under liberal Zionist administrations. Even the two state deals offered by Israel, aside from their many other issues, required leaving settlement blocks. 

- They haven’t done a suicide bombing in years (prior to the attempted one after Oct 7) and hamas was expelled from the West Bank, yet the situation just gets worse.

- The Arab peace initiative was offered and still is, and Israel rejected it.

Edited December 28, 2024 by Raze

[Breakingthewall]

2 minutes ago, Raze said:

Large responses don’t increase security. For example in 1982 they invaded Lebanon in a large response for security, but after sabra and shatila the shias turned against them and their security got worse. 

They did many large responses in Gaza such as 2008, 2014, and 2018, yet that just lead to Oct 7.

Iran didn’t attack israel, yet israel struck their embassy in Syria to assassinate their general, Iran responded by sending a small strike with advanced warning that was intercepted and said the issue is over and they won’t continue, israel then bombed the capital of Iran. That’s not responding, it’s escalating.

Regardless most security analysts say israel can’t destroy irans nuclear capabilities, at best it delays them but they will just move further underground and make them.

Iran has offered deals to not make nukes multiple times and was rejected by Israel, and they still haven’t made nukes, so they could try engaging with those. 

Iran simply knows that if they throw a bomb to Israel they will throw 200. You mentioned the violent episodes that happened even being hard, but if Israel would be softer, probably those events would be triple

[Nivsch]

No I don't answer if you push this word Zionists again. Use your own words and than we can talk. I am tired because in Israel it is 1:28 AM so I will wish you good night 🌔🌿

Edited December 28, 2024 by Nivsch

[Raze]

2 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

Iran simply knows that if they throw a bomb to Israel they will throw 200. You mentioned the violent episodes that happened even being hard, but if Israel would be softer, probably those events would be triple

By that logic anyone attacking Israel is justified because they can just presume if they didn’t Israel would attack them even more.

[Raze]

Just now, Nivsch said:

No I don't answer if you push this word Zionists again. Use your own words and than we can talk. But I am tired because in Israel it is 1:28 am so I will wish you good night.

Liberal Zionist is what they call themselves. How is that inaccurate or an insult? They are liberals who believe in Zionism. 

[Nivsch]

Just now, Raze said:

Liberal Zionist is what they call themselves. How is that inaccurate or an insult? They are liberals who believe in Zionism. 

No no. "Zionist" for them has a totally different meaning with values of Co-existance. I know cause I learned this term in school.  This is why this word is misleading because you and them interpret and mean it very differently.

[Breakingthewall]

2 minutes ago, Raze said:

By that logic anyone attacking Israel is justified because they can just presume if they didn’t Israel would attack them even more.

It's not true, if you attack Israel they will attack you much more than if you don't do, that's the only thing that matters to Israel, anything else are luxury that they can't allow. They act to don't be attacked.

[Raze]

5 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

It's not true, if you attack Israel they will attack you much more than if you don't do, that's the only thing that matters to Israel, anything else are luxury that they can't allow. They act to don't be attacked.

That’s not true, israel has regularly attacked first.

Prior to the 1948 war israel was razing villages like at Deir Yassin.

The famous 1967 war began with an Israeli strike.

the PA in the West Bank hasn’t attacked israel in years and even works with the government, but Israel during that time seized more land, expelled more Palestinians, and allowed settlers to kill dozens every year.

The recent direct conformation with Iran began when Israel bombed Irans embassy. 

So following your logic, attacking Israel in response is necessary because doing nothing could be worse. 

[Raze]

13 minutes ago, Nivsch said:

No no. "Zionist" for them has a totally different meaning with values of Co-existance. I know cause I learned this term in school.  This is why this word is misleading because you and them interpret and mean it very differently.

When I say liberal Zionist I interpret it to mean they want a majority Jewish state with liberal values. 

[Breakingthewall]

6 minutes ago, Raze said:

That’s not true, israel has regularly attacked first.

Prior to the 1948 war israel was razing villages like at Deir Yassin.

The famous 1967 war began with an Israeli strike.

the PA in the West Bank hasn’t attacked israel in years and even works with the government, but Israel during that time seized more land, expelled more Palestinians, and allowed settlers to kill dozens every year.

The recent direct conformation with Iran began when Israel bombed Irans embassy. 

So following your logic, attacking Israel in response is necessary because doing nothing could be worse. 

I didn't mean that Israel is fair or good, just that if you attack them they will respond much harder than if you don't do. That of Cisjordania and many other things are disgusting, but they would say that it's necessary because the history shows that it's impossible to coexist with the Arabs . Then we could argue if that is true or not eternally 

[Raze]

3 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

I didn't mean that Israel is fair or good, just that if you attack them they will respond much harder than if you don't do. That of Cisjordania and many other things are disgusting, but they would say that it's necessary because the history shows that it's impossible to coexist with the Arabs . Then we could argue if that is true or not eternally 

Historically there were many examples Jewish communities coexisting peacefully in Arab states for long periods of time. Many Jews actually fled to the Middle East from Europe to escape violence. Prior to Zionism Palestinians specifically were known for living peacefully with large Christian and jewish minorities.

Edited December 28, 2024 by Raze

[Breakingthewall]

4 minutes ago, Raze said:

Historically there were many examples Jewish communities coexisting peacefully in Arab states for long periods of time. Many Jews actually fled to the Middle East from Europe to escape violence. Prior to Zionism Palestinians specifically were known for living peacefully with large Christian and jewish minorities.

This is the eternal discussion. Then they will say that the arabs started with terrorism in 1920, and that they declared a war of total destruction or expulsion in 1948 

Edited December 28, 2024 by Breakingthewall

[Raze]

31 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

This is the eternal discussion. Then they will say that the arabs started with terrorism in 1920, and that they declared a war of total destruction or expulsion in 1948 

In public, what they say privately is a different matter 

Quote

“If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?”
— David Ben-Gurion (the first Israeli Prime Minister)

“Let us not ignore the truth among ourselves … politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves… The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country. … Behind the terrorism [by the Arabs] is a movement, which though primitive is not devoid of idealism and self sacrifice.”
— David Ben Gurion 

 

[Raze]