Israel / Palestine News Thread

[Lyubov]

Iran with nukes would mean Israel would be fucked, at the same time I’m not sure I support Iran having nukes is a good idea. Read about their world view. 

[samijiben]

@Twentyfirst lol, yeah, just like saying I gotta take a dump

 

All is 1, habibi

[zazen]

There is obviously posturing in negotiations - which is what the whole withdrawal from US bases may have been about - to show Iran they mean business on Sundays final talk. But that was seems to be de-railed by Israel’s attack.

We’ll see if Iran remains restrained like last time when they attacked with warning and co-ordination to save face.

Seems to be following the Iraq WMD script.

This was written yesterday:

 

Israel can’t prevent Iran from gaining a nuke as they have the knowledge to do so. It may delay or make them think twice about it - but the ability remains. Irans facilities are deep within the mountains that can’t be reached.

Trump has said the bottom line is no nukes for Iran. Irans has said bottom line is no one can tell us not to enrich uranium for civilian purposes at least. When Israel says Iran is just around the corner from a nuke today - they aren’t wrong. But it’s not because they are making one - it’s because their level of enrichment is at the threshold where if they decide to go ahead and make a nuke, they could increase it and have one within days.

A bad attack on Iran just makes it more likely as they feel at existential risk.

Why would Iran trust Israel/US? Gaddafi in Libya agreed to abandon his weapons of mass destruction (WMD) program in exchange for normalised relations and he was couped. The Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA) was struck in 2015 and complied with and yet Trump pulled out of it 3 years later. The region has been destroyed by these same players and your next on the chopping block expected to trust them..

Edited June 13 by zazen

[Raze]

3 hours ago, samijiben said:

@Twentyfirst Iran is a real, existential threat to the survival of Israel.

Why do you think they invest so much time & energy into developing nukes?

You think they just want to have the nukes to have them?

 

We’ve been being told this for literally decades.

They aren’t investing in having nukes. They are investing in having the ability to make nukes but never made them.

It’s because states the US doesn’t like without nukes get toppled. Such as Iraq or Libya.

If they had nukes they wouldn’t use them because then they’d be quickly nuked themselves.

[Raze]

17 hours ago, PurpleTree said:

The ones who refuse. Do they go to jail?

They do jail them if they publicly say they are refusing out of empathy for Palestinians.

Example: https://www.newarab.com/news/idf-jailed-him-refusing-gaza-service-he-says-it-worth-it?amp

Nivisch never post about the ones refusing for humanitarian reasons like he doesn’t ever post statements by the few israeli politicians who say they are against killings of civilians in Gaza. 

[Nivsch]

41 minutes ago, Raze said:

They do jail them if they publicly say they are refusing out of empathy for Palestinians.

Example: https://www.newarab.com/news/idf-jailed-him-refusing-gaza-service-he-says-it-worth-it?amp

He is a teenager. Not reservist. If anyone do whatever they want the army itself would be at risk. Also the vast majority of the army is not combat-oriented but focused on defense, intelligence, logistics, communication, medical services and more.

Edited June 13 by Nivsch

[Nivsch]

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1DkiVDeiPh/

" Since the ceasefire with Iran and the killing of seven soldiers in Gaza, the public discourse about the war in Gaza has shifted rapidly—a change we haven’t seen since October 7th. The combination of these two events made it powerfully clear to the public that a war can be ended—and showed the horrific cost of not ending it. The fact that these two shocking events occurred within 24 hours seems to have triggered a collective awakening for many.

Over the past two days, calls to end the war have strengthened, intensified, and even reached into coalition ministers.

Gafni and Deri (!!) have called for ending the war. Gafni added that soldiers are dying pointlessly.

All the protest leaders (Shikma Bresler, Redman, Eyal Noh’e, Yaya Pink, Moran Katzenshtein, and others)—who not long ago supported continuing the war or avoided calling for its end—have in recent days expressed a firm stance for ending the war, explicitly referring to the needless deaths of soldiers. Yesterday’s major protest by activist groups was under the banner “Stopping the War in Gaza.”

Senior journalists have also sharpened their tone. Ben Caspit wrote that “the only reason another seven ‘flowers’ fell last night is because of Ben Gvir and Smotrich, who are frightening Netanyahu”—not security, not victory over Hamas, not protecting Gaza-area residents. Rather, just threats by Ben Gvir and Smotrich against Netanyahu. That’s what he wrote—and horrifically, he’s right. And there are many more voices like that.

What’s happening among the broader public? Even before the war with Iran, a large majority already supported bringing back the hostages and ending the war. According to our Acord survey (see the slide in the images), conducted in May, 70% of the public support ending the war versus only 15% against. Even among government supporters (!) there were significantly more supporters than opponents of ending the war (47% vs. 30%), and among opposition supporters there was a 91% consensus in favor of ending the war. Other surveys show similar findings. Now we can estimate that public support for ending the war may grow even higher—potentially reaching 80% of the public. That has never happened in Israel during wartime.

With all due caution, we can say that there may be a developing political and public momentum and a social norm against continuing the war—along with other external factors (Trump, etc.)—that could bring about an end to the war in Gaza. But that’s far from being decided by the government, because alongside public pressure there are “Kahanist” ministers threatening to bring down the government if it ceases the war, and a prime minister equipped with a poison machine, eager to spread the lie that Hamas isn’t ready for a deal to release all hostages—a lie that dampens the struggle to end the war.

And as Ben Caspit said, as parents of soldiers shout—soldiers are now dying pointlessly in the strip. And hostages are suffering, and perhaps—even perish—despite the possibility of bringing them back immediately. And Gazan civilians are dying by the dozens every day and suffering from terrible starvation.

Yet in the government, there are ministers who prefer death over life.

It’s a pity that the pressure to end the war is only arising now. In the future we will look back in disbelief. A massive loss of lives and suffering could have been avoided if this had happened a few months—or a year—ago.

But there are still many more lives to save. And that is the most important thing to do now: apply every possible pressure on the government to end the war.

Write, share, protest. Support the activists.

Until we stop the war in Gaza and bring back all the hostages. That day may not be far away. It might depend solely on us. We are on a life-saving mission. "

Edited June 28 by Nivsch

[Raze]

 

.

Edited June 29 by Raze

[zazen]

Israel fatigue is real. Even PBD clowns getting hot and bothered with each other over it:

NYC’s mayor winning:

UK’s largest music festival (Coachella) streamed on UK’s main BBC had one singer get the crowd chanting “death death to the IDF”:

 

[Nivsch]

4 hours ago, zazen said:

UK’s largest music festival (Coachella) streamed on UK’s main BBC had one singer get the crowd chanting “death death to the IDF”:

 

The exact same moral development of Smotrich, Ben Gvir, their parties and their supporters, just in a content reverse.

[Lyubov]

Israel has killed easily 1-200,000 Palestinians in Gaza since this war started in 2023. 90% of Gaza is ruble and there is starvation now. This is definitely a genocide. USA is definitely guilty as well for supporting this. I see both countries paying for this over time karma wise with them decaying themselves slowly and their citizens facing authoritarian regimes. 

[Raze]

3 hours ago, Nivsch said:

The exact same moral development of Smotrich, Ben Gvir, their parties and their supporters, just in a content reverse.

No, he is wishing death an on organization that has been accused of conducting a war of extermination by even the former Israeli prime minister. Smotrich and Ben Gvir are conducting that war of extermination. You have continued to defend and apologize for the IDF to enable them to conduct this war of extermination. Morally he is superior to you, as wishing death on war criminals is not as wrong as excusing their actions. 

[Nivsch]

The war continues only because of Ben Gvir, Smotrich and Netanyahu. "Death to IDF" means Oct7 in the entire Israel. Zero moral development.

Edited June 29 by Nivsch

[Twentyfirst]

9 hours ago, Nivsch said:

The war continues only because of Ben Gvir, Smotrich and Netanyahu. "Death to IDF" means Oct7 in the entire Israel. Zero moral development.

So you admit the Europeans are savage in development? 

Where do your grandparents come from again haha

[zazen]

Chanting death to anyone or thing is always going to be seen as provocative and crossing a line. At the same time “death to” is usually symbolic shorthand for ending the violence that X group causes. Same way Iran says death to America and Israel - the empire intervening and occupying the region, not the nation itself or its people.

There’s a difference between chanting death to the KKK vs Americans, or death to the Nazi’s vs the Germans, similarly death to the IDF (the group causing suffering to Palestinians) vs Israelis (who aren’t directly doing so).

Below we have chants shouting death to Arabs as a whole - which is starkly different;

 

[hundreth]

7 hours ago, zazen said:

Chanting death to anyone or thing is always going to be seen as provocative and crossing a line. At the same time “death to” is usually symbolic shorthand for ending the violence that X group causes. Same way Iran says death to America and Israel - the empire intervening and occupying the region, not the nation itself or its people.

There’s a difference between chanting death to the KKK vs Americans, or death to the Nazi’s vs the Germans, similarly death to the IDF (the group causing suffering to Palestinians) vs Israelis (who aren’t directly doing so).

Below we have chants shouting death to Arabs as a whole - which is starkly different;

 

 

I don't believe it's actually symbolic. But even if it was, what is the point of those chants? What do they hope to achieve with chants that evoke violence or violent language? It's the same thing as from the river to the sea. It is connected to an ideology that does want to eliminate all Jews, but the movement has co-opted it and tried to rebrand it as some kind of liberation slogan.

At worst, it is advocating for violence against the nation and or it's people. At best, it is "provocative" for the sake of being so, and ultimately driving Israeli and Jewish people around the world away from your cause. I really believe that Jews as a whole do care about justice and behaving morally, but then they hear these chants and see antisemitic attacks around the world ramp up, and then you want to rationalize the meaning behind the meaning behind the meaning of these chants. And so Jews support Israel and it's actions even more. If the world doesn't give a fuck about us, why should we give a fuck about them?

Edited June 30 by hundreth

[Raze]

2 hours ago, hundreth said:

 

It's the same thing as from the river to the sea. It is connected to an ideology that does want to eliminate all Jews,

That is not and never was what that meant from the Palestine movement. The PLO’s original goal was a equal federation when they used that term.

The only group using it as justification for elimination of a people is israel, the ruling likud party has that in its charter and it is what they are actively doing, killing, expelling, and subjugating all palestinians. 

Edited June 30 by Raze

[Nivsch]

On 30.6.2025 at 11:22 AM, zazen said:

At the same time “death to” is usually symbolic shorthand for ending the violence that X group causes

Whoever chants "death to" (no matter the side) is a red flag. In this case you can see also the body language and tonality that don't leave you any room of doubt.

[hundreth]

21 hours ago, Raze said:

That is not and never was what that meant from the Palestine movement. The PLO’s original goal was a equal federation when they used that term.

The only group using it as justification for elimination of a people is israel, the ruling likud party has that in its charter and it is what they are actively doing, killing, expelling, and subjugating all palestinians. 

Even if you give it a generous interpretation, it can easily be inferred as being destructive to Jews. So why force it? if you constantly have to add caveats to your slogan it is flawed.

Why not have a slogan like: "One state, for all" - or something more reflective of the intention.

Edited July 1 by hundreth

[zazen]

 

On 30/06/2025 at 4:39 PM, hundreth said:

 

I don't believe it's actually symbolic. But even if it was, what is the point of those chants? What do they hope to achieve with chants that evoke violence or violent language? It's the same thing as from the river to the sea. It is connected to an ideology that does want to eliminate all Jews, but the movement has co-opted it and tried to rebrand it as some kind of liberation slogan.

At worst, it is advocating for violence against the nation and or it's people. At best, it is "provocative" for the sake of being so, and ultimately driving Israeli and Jewish people around the world away from your cause. I really believe that Jews as a whole do care about justice and behaving morally, but then they hear these chants and see antisemitic attacks around the world ramp up, and then you want to rationalize the meaning behind the meaning behind the meaning of these chants. And so Jews support Israel and it's actions even more. If the world doesn't give a fuck about us, why should we give a fuck about them?

That's the hard part with these chants - not knowing what the person chanting thinks. If it's a Western liberal saying ''from the river to the sea'' it could mean democracy and freedom in terms of equal rights (self-determination included), if its a Palestinian it could mean liberation that could be in the form of two states or a single one, which further splinters into: are Israeli's expelled from the state or included in it.

But like you said, we get into rationalizing the meaning behind the meaning behind - but everyone has different meanings and definitions. And that's another issue with protest slogans - they have to be short and punchy which means they inevitably lead to misunderstanding and confusion unlike a well thought out article or essay.

I think what's getting to a lot of people is that more of a fuss is being made about these slogans (which should be dealt with as they incite violence/hatred) instead of stopping the actual actions of the IDF which have a state behind them that speaks in genocidal ways.

6 hours ago, Nivsch said:

Whoever chants "death to" (no matter the side) is a red flag. In this case you can see also the body language and tonality that don't leave you any room of doubt.

Yea these people were in a rave and dance/rave that way regardless of the song or slogan. This slogan is now being done by street protesters in Australia:

I think it just shows how much anger Israel has stirred up by its actions which ironically makes Jews less safe as there are people out there who conflate what the state of Israel does with Jewish people as a whole.

Edited July 1 by zazen