New War In Israel / Gaza

[Karmadhi]

@Lila9 This is proof that brutally crushing resistance and treating Palestinians as lesser and cleansing them does not work.

You take out Hamas in Gaza, another gets created in West Bank.

I had a conversation with some friends, they said West Bank should fight like Hamas did in Gaza because eventually Israel wants to kick them all out and treat them like subhuman trash.

Better die fighting.

This is the sentiment people have about Israel which motivates them to do stuff like you wrote.

Something fundamental needs to change, giving Palestinians right and some of their land back.

Otherwise you take out 1 head, 2 others replace it. Forever and ever. Endless cycle of violence.

 

[zazen]

Besides the details, doesn’t this whole conflict basically boil down to when Israel was created, how it was created, and how it currently exists.

Israel was established during a time when nationalism was popular but colonialism wasn’t. It was a humanitarian cause done on the back of European atrocities to the Jews culminating in the Holocaust - it was colonial power with the entitled colonial mindset which aided its establishment.  British colonial interests married to a humanitarian one. The first Zionist bank established was named the ‘Jewish Colonial Trust’ - the endeavour was supported by the ‘Palestine Jewish Colonization Association’ which willed its land assets to todays Jewish National Fund that which serves as a global fundraiser for Israeli settlement expansion.

The right to self determination and national consciousness came into the world, fine - but this doesn’t mean the right to self determination at the expense of dominating another group. The Palestinian locals were expected (without consultation) to give away a majority share of their land (56% in the partition plan) to a minority of recently arrived settlers who had been there at most 20 years and only made up a third of the population.

If Israel’s creation had occurred this way a few decades earlier it would have encountered less resistance and condemnation as it does in modern times as back then might was right. The few nations that remain today (Anglosphere) from colonisation developed over a much larger span of time - multiple decades to centuries and during a time where strength was respected and accepted once it had established itself over weakness.

Israel faces ongoing conflict and condemnation due to its perceived artificial creation and its ongoing occupation and subjugation of the inhabitants unlike states that organically evolve more naturally over time due to the geographic, political and cultural situation of the land and people. Remaining states that started as colonies do so by integrating the locals in a democracy. Israel wasn’t a grassroots movement so much as it was a top down implant. People from elsewhere revived a dormant language (Hebrew) used mostly in the context of religion for their newly formed nation, claimed it as their native tongue and tied it to their ancestral land. This creation was not in harmony with the region's natural circumstances and naturally caused disruption as it was thrust on already existing people for which it had little context or receptivity.  

Would it be correct then to say the project of Israel was a unnatural foreign imposition done in such a rapid space of time - in a time when colonialism was dying and in a world which now rejects any remains of it including the remaining colonial mindset that entitles one to take another's land and subjugate any locals resistance to this, which then gaslights this resistance as terrorism and any criticism as racist. The region still feels the shockwaves of Israel's inception and the locals are still undergoing oppressive dispossession till today.

Edited January 9 by zazen

[Lila9]

42 minutes ago, Karmadhi said:

@Lila9 This is proof that brutally crushing resistance and treating Palestinians as lesser and cleansing them does not work.

You take out Hamas in Gaza, another gets created in West Bank.

I had a conversation with some friends, they said West Bank should fight like Hamas did in Gaza because eventually Israel wants to kick them all out and treat them like subhuman trash.

Better die fighting.

This is the sentiment people have about Israel which motivates them to do stuff like you wrote.

Something fundamental needs to change, giving Palestinians right and some of their land back.

Otherwise you take out 1 head, 2 others replace it. Forever and ever. Endless cycle of violence.

 

How can we trust people who commit such brutal acts towards innocent Israelis just because they happen to be Israelis?

They killed a woman, Shani Louk, among many Israelis who were ideologically pro-peace. They did that so brutally, how can such people be trusted with a state?

https://www.ynetnews.com/magazine/article/hypel11uu6

Would you trust terrorists who are capable of this? Would you allow them more power, given they are passionate about killing you and are living near you, your children, family, and friends?

The Slaughter 710 on Telegram:

https://t.me/the_slaughter710

So far, they haven't shown a geniune desire for peace, instead, each year, they demonstrate a commitment to replacing Israel with Palestine and doing whatever it takes to achieve this. They have shown a false desire for peace in 1993 and then in 2018. But their actions don't match, because there is no true intention for peace.

People genuinely seeking peace don't behave in such a manner. They don't attack Israeli civilians and start war out of nowhere. 

But, they show interest in negotiation, in diplomatic actions, in educating their children for peace with Israel rather than hatred and not investing in weapons and terror organizations to kill Israelies.

I don't subscribe to the "they do that because they are oppressed" theory. Many oppressed groups don't exhibit similar behavior, suggesting a toxic ideological factor at play in their actions that isn't Israel's fault. Given this, there's no guarantee that this behavior will cease if they acquire more territory.

 

Edited January 9 by Lila9

[PurpleTree]

48 minutes ago, Karmadhi said:

 

Better die fighting.

Really? I mean for example Albert Einstein and Freddy Mercury fled and lived good inportant lives afterwards

[kenway]

@Lila9

1 Israeli = 1 Palestinian

Correct?

[zazen]

1 hour ago, Lila9 said:

I don't subscribe to the "they do that because they are oppressed" theory. Many oppressed groups don't exhibit similar behavior, suggesting a toxic ideological factor at play in their actions that isn't Israel's fault. Given this, there's no guarantee that this behavior will cease if they acquire more territory.

Resistance is baked into occupation - it can be expected until that occupation has completely subjugated the original population, genocides or cleanses them or has finally integrated them into a democratic state like America and Australia for example.

How this occupation is resisted will differ - India mostly had peaceful resistance against British occupation while the Algerian, Kenyan, Vietnamese or South African resistance included violence. Are Nelson Mandela from South Africa or Matt turner from the slave revolt terrorists?

The level of resistance depends on the level of oppression. The feminist suffragettes in England for example protested, vandalised property and committed arson in order to obtain the right to vote. Were they oppressed to the level Palestinians are?

When the avenues to peaceful protest have been blocked oppressed people are left with no other option. The BDS movement which helped end South African apartheid is out lawed legislatively - theres no talks of a two state and if there is one its only dangled like a carrot to keep them pacified and waiting while their land gets rapidly taken away in West Bank - any discussions of a state only offer 'less than a state' in the words of Rabin with limited right of return, security presence etc which fails meeting the international standard of a sovereign state.

Israel thought it can just go on as is and the Palestinian issue is just a thorn on its side that needs removing whenever it pricks them - that the world will forget about them and it could go on to normalise with the Arab nations - this is why they had a uprising and put their cause back on the world stage including Israel's atrocities which they self incriminate themselves with boastfully - it was a cry for the world not to forget them, a violent cry.

Edited January 9 by zazen

[Karmadhi]

1 hour ago, Lila9 said:

How can we trust people who commit such brutal acts towards innocent Israelis just because they happen to be Israelis?

They killed a woman, Shani Louk, among many Israelis who were ideologically pro-peace. They did that so brutally, how can such people be trusted with a state?

https://www.ynetnews.com/magazine/article/hypel11uu6

Would you trust terrorists who are capable of this? Would you allow them more power, given they are passionate about killing you and are living near you, your children, family, and friends?

The Slaughter 710 on Telegram:

https://t.me/the_slaughter710

So far, they haven't shown a geniune desire for peace, instead, each year, they demonstrate a commitment to replacing Israel with Palestine and doing whatever it takes to achieve this. They have shown a false desire for peace in 1993 and then in 2018. But their actions don't match, because there is no true intention for peace.

People genuinely seeking peace don't behave in such a manner. They don't attack Israeli civilians and start war out of nowhere. 

But, they show interest in negotiation, in diplomatic actions, in educating their children for peace with Israel rather than hatred and not investing in weapons and terror organizations to kill Israelies.

I don't subscribe to the "they do that because they are oppressed" theory. Many oppressed groups don't exhibit similar behavior, suggesting a toxic ideological factor at play in their actions that isn't Israel's fault. Given this, there's no guarantee that this behavior will cease if they acquire more territory.

That war comes from oppression and desire for ethnic cleansing.

Israel treats them like shit, so they should not cry about being attacked.

Here is a solution for you: Go back to 1947 borders and give them 50% of the land. Lets see if Israel wants to do that. Doing that would decrease terrorism by a ton. Also do war crime trials for anyone that has broken international law. 

Give Palestinians equal rights rather than random soldiers raiding their houses at 3am without any warrant or shooting kids via snipers.

Do all of these and I assure you terrorism will be greatly reduced.

But ofc they wont do that because fundamentally Isarel are also selfish devils.

[Nivsch]

1 hour ago, Karmadhi said:

That war comes from oppression and desire for ethnic cleansing.

This isn't true.

You just can't enter Israel's shoes.

95% of the Israelis are just want to live in their borders and thats all, as long as they aren't provoked severely.

Edited January 9 by Nivsch

[zazen]

@Nivsch

People can see Israel's side in this - they just don't agree to the entitlement that some of its population have. When people mention apartheid, occupation or ethnic cleansing they're referring to West Bank or Gaza more so than Israel proper. Like that video you shared of that girl asking where is apartheid - its like showing Beverly Hills mansions and saying where is the income inequality? But completely missing out the ghettos of LA.

You have acknowledged the settlers are a problem also so you're aware of it, maybe just not the scale or how big of a problem it is. The settler expansion in West Bank gets in the way of a two state solution. But if there isn't going to be a two state solution because the settlers aren't going to move then what is Israels choice? To go on as its going on and hope the world just forgets about Palestinians? It can't go on the way it is. 

Edited January 9 by zazen

[Nivsch]

@zazen The peace offers obviously meant that a deal = end of settlements expansion, but the palestinians still refused.

[Karmadhi]

36 minutes ago, Nivsch said:

This isn't true.

You just can't enter Israel's shoes.

The issue is decades of occupacion and atrocities.

If you look at the situation in 2023, you can say that a lot of the measures are necessary, fair.

However, the reason they are necessary is because of deep resentment that comes from people that have been oppressed all their lives.

It is an endless cycle of violence and hatred. I have never seen in the world such hatred between two groups of people.

Someone needs to step up, swallow their pride/ego and put an end to the hate, even if it costs them a bit.

Same way Mandela did.

Since Israel is a lot richer, more developed and has more educated people it has the moral obligation in my opinion to do so.

With great power and knowledge comes great responsability.

The current Israeli government is the worst government possible to do so.

Leo also said that Israel has been doing lowkey ethnic cleansing for 50 years now. Unless you recognize this, put a stop on it instead of funding further illegal settlements and calling for Gaza to be ethnically cleansed, there will be no more change and Palestinians will still try to do terrorist attacks on you.

Edited January 9 by Karmadhi

[Nivsch]

@Karmadhi Didn't the countless peace offers mean to put the ego aside?

Edited January 9 by Nivsch

[zazen]

9 minutes ago, Nivsch said:

@Karmadhi Didn't the countless peace offers mean to put the ego aside?

Bro we've been over the peace offers before and why they weren't good enough for the Palestinians or deemed as fair. It wouldn't be a true state or sovereign basically. A few Israeli security points would remain, demilitarised, no ability to form alliances or agreements with other nations without Israels approval, resources such as water still within Israels control etc. What difference is there to that and what the current situation is in West Bank?

Israeli military control it and what have they done with their power or allowed to be done? Settlement expansion. Also, stopping settlement expansion isn't enough anymore, a lot will have to be removed which is almost impossible considering how far right the settlers are and now that they are armed. Its a tough situation because the land that is actually seen as the holiest part to Jews is in the West Bank which is supposed to make up any future Palestinian state.

Edited January 9 by zazen

[kenway]

"My suffering is not the same as your suffering."

[Danioover9000]

@jaylimix

6 hours ago, jaylimix said:

What if I were to tell you that I am in favor of ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, not through death but through sending them away to other Arab countries, even non-Arab countries such as Congo ?

75 years of terrorism, actually even before the founding of Israel, longer than 75 years of terrorism.

   Okay so you're pro immigration, pro artificial means of increasing immigration then, regardless if it's genocidal means? Cute, only an atheist, secularist, egalitarian feminist would say this talking point. Yeah! Go mass immigration, displace the native population towards western countries! Yeah. Um, no, to only displace Palestinians from their lands, and some of them terrorists, by your logic, will only increase more terrorism, and SPREAD TERRORISM TO OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLD! Furthermore this displacement and ethnic cleansing is itself a humanitarian crisis, and increasing the immigration crisis already felt by most western countries and some eastern countries is foolish. What we should instead is help nation build Palestine, but OH NO! The Israeli Zionist alt right in charge don't like that one bit! Don't nation build Palestine next door, even though that's part of democracy though.

Edited January 9 by Danioover9000

[Danioover9000]

@zazen

4 hours ago, zazen said:

Besides the details, doesn’t this whole conflict basically boil down to when Israel was created, how it was created, and how it currently exists.

Israel was established during a time when nationalism was popular but colonialism wasn’t. It was a humanitarian cause done on the back of European atrocities to the Jews culminating in the Holocaust - it was colonial power with the entitled colonial mindset which aided its establishment.  British colonial interests married to a humanitarian one. The first Zionist bank established was named the ‘Jewish Colonial Trust’ - the endeavour was supported by the ‘Palestine Jewish Colonization Association’ which willed its land assets to todays Jewish National Fund that which serves as a global fundraiser for Israeli settlement expansion.

The right to self determination and national consciousness came into the world, fine - but this doesn’t mean the right to self determination at the expense of dominating another group. The Palestinian locals were expected (without consultation) to give away a majority share of their land (56% in the partition plan) to a minority of recently arrived settlers who had been there at most 20 years and only made up a third of the population.

If Israel’s creation had occurred this way a few decades earlier it would have encountered less resistance and condemnation as it does in modern times as back then might was right. The few nations that remain today (Anglosphere) from colonisation developed over a much larger span of time - multiple decades to centuries and during a time where strength was respected and accepted once it had established itself over weakness.

Israel faces ongoing conflict and condemnation due to its perceived artificial creation and its ongoing occupation and subjugation of the inhabitants unlike states that organically evolve more naturally over time due to the geographic, political and cultural situation of the land and people. Remaining states that started as colonies do so by integrating the locals in a democracy. Israel wasn’t a grassroots movement so much as it was a top down implant. People from elsewhere revived a dormant language (Hebrew) used mostly in the context of religion for their newly formed nation, claimed it as their native tongue and tied it to their ancestral land. This creation was not in harmony with the region's natural circumstances and naturally caused disruption as it was thrust on already existing people for which it had little context or receptivity.  

Would it be correct then to say the project of Israel was a unnatural foreign imposition done in such a rapid space of time - in a time when colonialism was dying and in a world which now rejects any remains of it including the remaining colonial mindset that entitles one to take another's land and subjugate any locals resistance to this, which then gaslights this resistance as terrorism and any criticism as racist. The region still feels the shockwaves of Israel's inception and the locals are still undergoing oppressive dispossession till today.

   Yes, it is correct to say that. But good luck saying that to the pro Ice rails here, cuz they're cod blooded and unsympathetic to human suffering they're side is causing.

[Danioover9000]

@kenway

4 hours ago, kenway said:

@Lila9

1 Israeli = 1 Palestinian

Correct?

   Yes, for them it's 1 to 1 obviously not a 1 to 10,000 women and children right?

[kenway]

1 minute ago, Danioover9000 said:

@kenway

   Yes, for them it's 1 to 1 obviously not a 1 to 10,000 women and children right?

I don't know - I'll have to check my "Zionist Supremacy for Dummies" handbook and find out what the current rate of exchange is.

 

[Danioover9000]

@Nivsch

1 hour ago, Nivsch said:

This isn't true.

You just can't enter Israel's shoes.

95% of the Israelis are just want to live in their borders and thats all, as long as they aren't provoked severely.

   Of course he can't enter Israel's shoes because their size is so tiny only garden gnomes can fit their size, with little empathy and understanding of human suffering, fed with misleading and misinformation campaigns from their media and most western media, from a corrupted information ecology, and factoring in many developmental factors like value structures, cognitive and moral development, personality types and psychology, Architypes, ego development, and other lines of development in person to societal domains, and ideological beliefs indoctrinated by culture, family upbringing and information consumed that conforms and influences their worldviews, and this situation being war, a dark subject matter that triggers thought terminating cliches, empathy is greatly reduced and common sense flies out the window, and regression will happen in other developmental factors.

[Lyubov]

4 hours ago, zazen said:

Besides the details, doesn’t this whole conflict basically boil down to when Israel was created, how it was created, and how it currently exists.

Israel was established during a time when nationalism was popular but colonialism wasn’t. It was a humanitarian cause done on the back of European atrocities to the Jews culminating in the Holocaust - it was colonial power with the entitled colonial mindset which aided its establishment.  British colonial interests married to a humanitarian one. The first Zionist bank established was named the ‘Jewish Colonial Trust’ - the endeavour was supported by the ‘Palestine Jewish Colonization Association’ which willed its land assets to todays Jewish National Fund that which serves as a global fundraiser for Israeli settlement expansion.

The right to self determination and national consciousness came into the world, fine - but this doesn’t mean the right to self determination at the expense of dominating another group. The Palestinian locals were expected (without consultation) to give away a majority share of their land (56% in the partition plan) to a minority of recently arrived settlers who had been there at most 20 years and only made up a third of the population.

If Israel’s creation had occurred this way a few decades earlier it would have encountered less resistance and condemnation as it does in modern times as back then might was right. The few nations that remain today (Anglosphere) from colonisation developed over a much larger span of time - multiple decades to centuries and during a time where strength was respected and accepted once it had established itself over weakness.

Israel faces ongoing conflict and condemnation due to its perceived artificial creation and its ongoing occupation and subjugation of the inhabitants unlike states that organically evolve more naturally over time due to the geographic, political and cultural situation of the land and people. Remaining states that started as colonies do so by integrating the locals in a democracy. Israel wasn’t a grassroots movement so much as it was a top down implant. People from elsewhere revived a dormant language (Hebrew) used mostly in the context of religion for their newly formed nation, claimed it as their native tongue and tied it to their ancestral land. This creation was not in harmony with the region's natural circumstances and naturally caused disruption as it was thrust on already existing people for which it had little context or receptivity.  

Would it be correct then to say the project of Israel was a unnatural foreign imposition done in such a rapid space of time - in a time when colonialism was dying and in a world which now rejects any remains of it including the remaining colonial mindset that entitles one to take another's land and subjugate any locals resistance to this, which then gaslights this resistance as terrorism and any criticism as racist. The region still feels the shockwaves of Israel's inception and the locals are still undergoing oppressive dispossession till today.

I would agree with your assessment here. I think Israel is very much seen as  artificial to many. It is a unique outlier when it comes to state building and the formation of a nation into a state. It has the colonial element of the British who oversaw that region after the Ottomans. The British didn’t really care about the local populations or how their mandates and whatnot would cause complex issues for the true locals of the region. Keep in mind there were Palestinians there through British rule and for several 100s of years prior, all through  the Ottoman Empire. Nations prior to the modern concept of state were much looser in definition and often had fewer political aspirations and desires to build countries. This is probably the biggest lie that comes from Israel. The people there have this totally bullshit narrative that they are entitled to the land there because the people they claim as their “ancestors” once lived there but were forcibly removed. Keep in mind this happened like 1000+ years ago during Roman times and a couple hundred years after. It’s just completely asinine garbage. Hebrew was a dead language with little connection to the modern Israel apart form it being historically a Jewish language. The land was given to refugees of WWII and there is a humanitarian element to it as well since it served western interests to have an ally in the Middle East. There was also wealthy backers who identified as Jewish and wanted to build their own state. Israel’s formation is complex to say the least and it is comprised of  humanitarian effort, western geopolitical interests, colonialism, ethnic jewish nation building and of course plenty of lies about the whole narrative of the country. I would definitely say modern states like the USA and Brazil were much more organic in terms of forming into what they are today.