[-]

moderngamer327@reddit

You’re claiming I need to read up on my history when you don’t even have the name right. It was The War of Attrition not Aggression. Egypt is also who started the war not Israel

[-]

Drab_Majesty@reddit

Multiple countries? In particular the ones that invaded? What did the UN say?

It is not an act of aggression, invading and trying to kill the native population rather than negotiating terms is the act of aggression.

[-]

moderngamer327@reddit

What on earth are you talking about? Why does the UN matter at all for this conversation? Do you just genuinely not know anything about the history of this?

[-]

Drab_Majesty@reddit

Is that a serious question, why does the UN matter? Were you home schooled or something?

[-]

moderngamer327@reddit

Why does the UN matter in this specific context

[-]

Drab_Majesty@reddit

Do you know the purpose of the UN?

There was this big global conflict called World War 2 and in a bid to avoid an event of that nature happening again the United Nations was founded to maintain international peace and security. Encourage mediation and diplomacy to contain conflicts. It also authorizes sanctions to pressure states to follow international law.

Do you ever not talk out of your ass? Yes Illegal by the UN's standard, is that a bad thing? It sounds to me you are trying to go mask off as a fascist. Israel does the invading, this is just a fact. You don't get to cry when the oppressed fight back.

[-]

moderngamer327@reddit

Yes I actually disagree with the UN’s ruling that a country cannot annex new land regardless of the circumstances. Israel along with a few other countries attacked Israel after Egypt indirectly declared war. I think it’s entirely fair to lose land in a war you started.

Except that example I mention where they literally weren’t the ones that invaded that you keep continently tiptoeing around

[-]

Drab_Majesty@reddit

Israel was created by Zionists invading Palestine and decades of terrorism. Since it's formation Israel has continued to invade and illegally seize land. It is not an invasion when the countries you stole land from come to kick your shit in and take back their land. I am not tiptoeing around your stupidity, it is there for all to see.

[-]

moderngamer327@reddit

There wasn’t an invasion. Jews immigrated to the region for decades before its founding.

Almost every single invasion was in response to them being attacked first

Except the countries that initially attacked Israeli(with the exception of Palestine) in the 1948 Arab-Israeli war did not have any of their land stolen and it fact annexed Palestinian territory

[-]

Drab_Majesty@reddit

Zionists were coming to Palestine illegally... it was kind of a big deal at the time if you bothered to read up on it.

We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it any employment in our own country.

Herzl

Palestine was invaded by Zionists from Europe and the region has been in constant conflict ever since.

[-]

moderngamer327@reddit

Illegally based on whose laws? Jews were immigrating to the region and buying land. It also wasn’t Palestine at the time.

Settlers yes, colony no. A colony is something created by a country not just people gathering from around the world

[-]

Drab_Majesty@reddit

You have an inherently simplistic and binary understanding of what a colony is and you are inherently wrong.You have to take it up with the Zionists themselves.

It is the iron law of every colonizing movement, a law which knows of no exceptions, a law which existed in all times and under all circumstances. If you wish to colonize a land in which people are already living, you must provide a garrison on your behalf. Or else, give up your colonization, for without an armed force which will render physically impossible any attempts to destroy or prevent this colonization, colonization is impossible, not “difficult”, not “dangerous” but IMPOSSIBLE! Zionism is a colonizing adventure and therefore it stands or falls by the question of armed force. It is important to build, it is important to speak Hebrew, but, unfortunately, it is even more important to be able to shoot or else I am through with playing at colonialization.

DevA248@reddit

Yeah, you are not refuting anything I said above.

For example, you cite the "War of Independence, 1948." In actuality, this war started in 1947 and is properly known as the Nakba. It was when Israel established itself through bloody massacres and expelling the Palestinian people... only after Palestinians were expelled to neighboring countries did some of them intervene.

For another example, the "Suez Crisis." Egypt has the right to block anyone from the Suez Canal, after all the canal is in Egypt. However, Israel/Britain/France decided to invade Egypt in response, which was an act of aggression. Naturally Israel is a colonial power, so it teams up with the British and French empires.

Yes I am.

You can just keep denying it, or you can face up to reality.

British imperialism through the empire's policies in Mandate Palestine created Zionism. The settlements largely didn't succeed under the Ottoman Empire because they weren't financially viable.

Yeah, you admit that the US supported the creation of Israel. So now you were just lying the whole time. How classic.

[-]

moderngamer327@reddit

No Zionism was created decades prior.

When I say supported I mean actually helped not just passed a vote in favor. That vote also did nothing as the plan to divide Israel and Palestine never was actually enacted. The US did nothing to provide arms or aid

[-]

Can Japan tomorrow nuke the USA because of Hiroshima?

Like we live in a world where we have to eventually make peace or at least agree to disagree.

This doesn’t cleanse the past, or even means you have to forgive or forget. But it does mean that eventually things have to stop.

It says you’re from Jordan. There’s no way you’re actually ethnically Jordanian because if you were you would know about your own history and what the Palestinians did there.

BUT HERE WE ARE with a Jordanian King whose wife is of Palestinian heritage. Should he hold a grudge for what some of her ancestors did to his grandfather?

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

This is awesome. You say “what they have done over the years is reprehensible but…” and then proceed to defend everything they have done over the years. It’s the blatant double standard - Egypt blockading Israel is an act of war, but Israel blockading Palestinians isn’t. Israel bombing the Gaza Strip isn’t aggression, but Hamas firing back rockets is. Israel killing Palestinian kids in the West Bank is ‘just occupation,’ but Palestinians killing Israeli kids is ‘terrorism.’

Israel isn’t ever going to stop, and you will defend everything atrocity while claiming you aren’t.

[-]

Drab_Majesty@reddit

The UN disagrees, nephew. Israel has the resolutions against it to prove it.

Israel was forced to illegally occupy its neighbours... lmao Zionist cope.

[-]

moderngamer327@reddit

When did the UN ever claim Israel has not been invaded?

[-]

Drab_Majesty@reddit

You're asking me to prove a negative, have you got a resolution that supports your notion that the UN believes Israel was invaded?

[-]

moderngamer327@reddit

You’re the one who claimed the UN disagrees

Did I say it did?

It’s not just religion that I’m referring to. Just like how Jewish can describe a religion it can describe a people too. A Christian Palestinian isn’t someone who is necessarily a believer in Christ it can also refer to their history. And Palestinians also slaughtered other Palestinians.

The local population was not displaced by people immigrating. People were only displaced after the Nakba.

What rights do they not have?

[-]

Drab_Majesty@reddit

You should educate yourself further, Palestinian farmers were already being evicted with the beginnings of Zionism. Jews also slaughtered other Jews how is this even remotely relevant?

Holy fuck I am not going to hold your hand because you are ignorant. Start with the 2018 Nation State Law and expand from that.

[-]

Drab_Majesty@reddit

Mr Dunning Kruger, please don't make me laugh. The West Bank settlers are considered citizens of Israel because Israel does not recognise Palestine as anything but Israeli land. Of course that is only applied to Jews.

[-]

moderngamer327@reddit

Living in a territory does not make you a citizen of that territory. I do think it’s wrong that they are not granting them citizenship as it’s basically a way for them to eat their cake and have it too, but that has nothing to do with my statement. You are aware there are Palestinians who have actual Israeli citizenship right? I don’t mean they are “Palestinians who live in Israeli territory”, I mean they are “Palestinian and have Israeli citizenship”

It’s not complicating anything I’m giving you the reality of it. Arabs refer to people that are from a specific region. That region contains different more specific ethnic groups. One of those ethnic groups are Jews. It’s not irrelevant at all. You are specifically in your examples treating Arabs as a completely different group than Jews. Are you saying that it applies to non Arab Jews? Are you saying it includes Arab Jews? Do certain Arab ethnic groups have more rights or are all Arab rights the same even Arab Jews?

That’s a completely different example. As you are comparing two identities based distinct regions.( Unless you are referring to Americans in the broad sense in which case Mexicans are actually American.). Jewish is an ethnic group not limited to a specific region. Arab though does refer to an ethnic group in a specific region in the same way Mexican does

[-]

Drab_Majesty@reddit

Reality bahahahahaha let’s not confuse complexity with honesty. Adding layers of context is fine but you are just deliberately dribbling shit to deflect. It is nonsense and has no relevance, a perfect example of gish gallop.

[-]

moderngamer327@reddit

How is it not relevant to the conversation? You still haven’t given any details either. You say Arabs can’t get building permission but you have clarified which Arabs, where, when, or under what context

[-]

Drab_Majesty@reddit

How is it relevant?

[Are you denying that Arabs are constantly facing discrimination in Israel?] (https://www.hrw.org/news/2010/10/08/israel-grant-status-long-denied-arab-village-central-israel) You don't need to be spoonfed, brother. You can research development approvals in Israel using your big brain energy.

[-]

moderngamer327@reddit

How is it not?

Depends on the Arab but yes some definitely do face discrimination.

Based on what I’ve read on the topic is seems like they actually do have the same rights legally enshrined it’s just not being enforced as it should. If anything that source reinforces my point

[-]

Drab_Majesty@reddit

Simple question, why do you think it is relevant?

[-]

moderngamer327@reddit

Because “Arab” can mean a lot of different things. If you say “Arabs weren’t allowed to build here” could just as easily mean “Jews were not allowed to build here”, or “Palestinians were not allowed to build here”. One of those is a sign of discrimination, one of those is not. Also saying they are discriminating against Arabs doesn’t even make sense in context because most of the Jews are also Arabs.

[-]

chloesobored@reddit

Its almost like asking anybody to disarm is a completely unreasonable thing to ask which wouldn't be thrown into any good faith deal.

Look, Hamas is a terrorist organization. Demanding they disarm is obviously going to be a nonstarter. Israel knows that and doesn't care because their plan is to wipe Palestinians off the map.

[-]

mr2600@reddit

Gaza shouldn’t disarm until its aggressor does”, is a false equivalence.

Israel is a sovereign state facing existential threats; Hamas is a non-state actor whose founding charter calls for the destruction of Israel.

So Israel refusing to disarm isn’t the same as Hamas refusing.

Now don’t get me wrong. Israels hands a red with blood and there are nut jobs who more and more are no longer just a vocal minority but also a vocal minority who are in power.

[-]

chloesobored@reddit

I am not saying they are equivalent.

I am saying that Israel knows full well Hamas will never willingly disarm and hence demanding something they know will not occur is pageantry which enables Israel to continue with their ethnic cleansing mission while claiming it didn't have to be this way.

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

Israel is a sovereign state facing existential threats

Whats the ruling govts charter say?

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

Israel is a sovereign state facing existential threats

What existential threats? This is just pro-Likud BS talking points.

[-]

mr2600@reddit

Would you like your receipt emailed or printed? Link to founding Hamas charter in English.

It’s well worth reading the entire thing. It’s very enlightening.

Article 13 literally says that renouncing any part of Palestine, renounces Islam and that talking has failed. The final paragraph says “there is no solution to the Palestinian problem except jihad.

I’ve pasted the full of article below:

Article Thirteen [Peace] initiatives, the so-called peaceful solutions, and the international conferences to resolve the Palestinian problem, are all contrary to the beliefs of the Islamic Resistance Movement. For renouncing any part of Palestine means renouncing part of the.religion; the nationalism of the Islamic Resistance Movement is part of its faith, the movement educates its members to adhere to its principles and to raise the banner of Allah over their homeland as they fight their Jihad: "Allah is the all-powerful, but most people are not aware." From time to time a clamoring is voiced, to hold an International Conference in search for a solution to the problem. Some accept the idea, others reject it, for one reason or another, demanding the implementation of this or that conditions, as a prerequisite for agreeing to convene the Conference or for participating in it. But the Islamic Resistance Movement, which is aware of the [prospective] parties to this conference, and of their past and present positions towards the problems of the Muslims, does not believe that those conferences are capable of responding to demands, or of restoring rights or doing justice to the oppressed. Those conferences are no more than a means to appoint the nonbelievers as arbitrators in the lands of Islam. Since when did the Unbelievers do justice to the Believers? This statement is similar to the al Qaeda statement — says "there is no nuddl4 (mind — Jihad is the only way — Offer B. And the Jews will not be pleased with thee, nor will the Christians, till thou follow their creed. 'Say: Lo! the guidance of Allah [himself] is the Guidance. And if you should follow their desires after the knowledge which has come unto thee, then you would have from Allah neither protecting friend nor helper." Surah 2 (the Cow) verse 120. There is no solution to the Palestinian problem except by Jihad. The initiatives, proposals and International Conferences are but a waste of time (27), an exercise in futility. The Palestinian people are too noble to have their future, their right and their destiny submitted to a vain game. As the Hadith has it:

"They don’t care for them but they don’t quite have the same level of hatred as they do for germany"

- someone in the 30s

[-]

WallyWestJest@reddit

This is the same argument that Rhodesians and Afrikaaners/Boers used to justify their actions.

[-]

cobcat@reddit

This stupid attitude will just lead to another couple thousand innocent Palestinian deaths a few years down the line. Palestinians lost. It's time to accept that and move on, not throw their children into a meat grinder over and over.

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

What does “moving on” look like to you? Live stateless under apartheid rule while Israel slowly ethnically cleanses you? A fast ethnic cleansing? Genocide? Please let us know which of these three options you would like for the Palestinians.

[-]

cobcat@reddit

What does “moving on” look like to you?

Give up the idea that Israel will disappear or stop being a Jewish state. That ship has sailed.

Live stateless under apartheid rule while Israel slowly ethnically cleanses you?

No.

Please let us know which of these three options you would like for the Palestinians.

I want Palestinians to have a state roughly within the borders of the current Palestinian territories. Pretty much what Olmert offered and what was offered at Taba.

That state will not be sovereign straight away. Israel will have security guarantees and oversight of e.g. the Jordanian border and the airspace. If the peace lasts, those guarantees should be reduced and eventually eliminated.

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

Eventually? What timeframe? 30 years? 50 years? We are still waiting for Israel to implement their obligations under phase 1 of Oslo, but I guess that it’s only been 39 years so we still have some time left…

What happens to the settlers?

[-]

cobcat@reddit

Eventually? What timeframe? 30 years?

Impossible to say. At this rate - never.

We are still waiting for Israel to implement their obligations under phase 1 of Oslo

Oslo was killed by Hamas. That's over.

What happens to the settlers?

The larger settlements will stay. Israel won't evict 700.000 settlers. The smaller settlements should be dismantled.

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

cobcat:

Impossible to say. At this rate - never.

That’s just what Netanyahu says!

Oslo was killed by Hamas. That's over.

There is a great video of Netanyahu gloating about how he killed Oslo and Clinton let him do it. But sure, vote Netanyahu in for mist of 30 years and then blame Hamas for stopping peace…

The larger settlements will stay. Israel won't evict 700.000 settlers. The smaller settlements should be dismantled.

So the West Bank won’t be contiguous?

[-]

cobcat@reddit

That’s just what Netanyahu says!

Well he's right about that part. I don't see anyone within the Palestinian political spectrum step up and advocate for peace at the cost of the Palestinian dream to take back the land.

There is a great video of Netanyahu gloating about how he killed Oslo

Netanyahu made Hamas do bus bombings? Man this Netanyahu guy really is everywhere.

So the West Bank won’t be contiguous?

Did you read what I said? Most large settlements are close to the border. These will stay, there's no way around it. The smaller ones that currently split the West Bank should go. The West Bank should be contiguous.

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

Lots of other Israelis agree with Netanyahu too. The demand of ever more concessions from Palestinians is his favourite tactic. But I do wonder why so many Israelis believe him and vote for him due to his gloating about killing Oslo. They must know something you don’t.

Do you actually know the death toll from the Hamas bombings? Or the other side? Thought not.

Ariel is deep in the West Bank. How does Ariel remain part of Israel and the West Bank not effectively get split in two,

[-]

cobcat@reddit

They must know something you don’t.

They believe that Palestinians will never accept peace and every concession only backfires. And they are kind of correct about the last part. But I do hope that Palestinians will agree to peace one day.

Do you actually know the death toll from the Hamas bombings? Or the other side? Thought not.

I do. Sure, more Palestinians die. That's what happens when you attack a more powerful country. Far more Germans and Japanese died in WW2 too. Does that make them right?

Ariel is deep in the West Bank. How does Ariel remain part of Israel and the West Bank not effectively get split in two?

Ariel has 20 000 inhabitants. It's a fairly small settlement, and it should be dismantled. But also, it's not even really splitting anything because it's an east west valley. It's not like it's blocking any north-south travel. Should still be removed though.

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

cobcat:

They believe that Palestinians will never accept peace and every concession only backfires.

Or rather, they know the history and how Netanyahu renegotiated Oslo and failed to implement any of the steps required of Israel, essentially enabling unrestrained settlement growth with mass murdering Palestinians.

I know you like to blame Palestinians for what Israelis do wrong, but honesty could get you understanding.

And they are kind of correct about the last part. But I do hope that Palestinians will agree to peace one day.

Says someone who says they in no way supports keeping Palestinians stateless and without rights, but who opposes all action to resolve the situation.

I do. Sure, more Palestinians die. That's what happens when you attack a more powerful country.

But this isn’t the case of a country attacking another country. This is a case of Israeli terrorism being condoned and encouraged while screaming that Palestinians are bad for engaging in terrorism. Controlling the narrative on western media is great as you can watch terrorist like Goldstein massacre dozens, condemn him, then crack down on his victims and mass murder dozens more while claiming to be the victim.

Far more Germans and Japanese died in WW2 too. Does that make them right?

They were the aggressors, like Israelis here. You don’t get to occupy, mass murder and genocide a population and say you are the victim after almost 60 years.

Ariel has 20 000 inhabitants. It's a fairly small settlement, and it should be dismantled. But also, it's not even really splitting anything because it's an east west valley. It's not like it's blocking any north-south travel. Should still be removed though.

You will find ethnically cleansing Jews is considered a terrible act that Israelis and Zionists will be outraged at and oppose vehemently. Ethnically cleansing Palestinians, by comparison, is fine and will be accepted without any protest by western leaders and Israelis.

[-]

cobcat@reddit

I know you like to blame Palestinians for what Israelis do wrong, but honesty could get you understanding.

Do you dispute that the main thing that turned public opinion in Israel against Oslo was the Hamas bombing campaign? Because that was the main thing that killed Oslo, despite what Bibi claims.

who opposes all action to resolve the situation.

What action do you think I oppose exactly? What would resolve the situation in your eyes?

But this isn’t the case of a country attacking another country.

I agree that it's more complicated than two countries fighting. But it's close enough, and it would be exactly that if Palestine becomes a state.

This is a case of Israeli terrorism being condoned and encouraged while screaming that Palestinians are bad for engaging in terrorism.

Where did I condone Israeli terrorism? The closest thing to that is settler violence, and I abhor the settlers and condemn them all day long. They are not at all helpful. But it's also worth pointing out that this conflict predates West Bank settlers by 50 years, so while they are extremely detrimental, they are not a cause.

They were the aggressors, like Israelis here. You don’t get to occupy, mass murder and genocide a population and say you are the victim after almost 60 years.

No, the Israelis aren't the aggressors. They immigrated legally and nonviolently. They wanted self-determination in their homeland, something both they and Palestinian Arabs deserve. It was Arabs who violently opposed them. You can justify that if you want, but none of this makes Israel the aggressor. They repeatedly agreed to peace deals, and Arabs repeatedly attacked them. Again, you can argue that they were justified in attacking the Jews, but attack them they did. Those are historical facts.

You will find ethnically cleansing Jews is considered a terrible act that Israelis and Zionists will be outraged at and oppose vehemently. Ethnically cleansing Palestinians, by comparison, is fine and will be accepted without any protest by western leaders and Israelis.

So where exactly do you disagree with me here? Should the settlements be dismantled or not?

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

I was going to answer your points seriously but I see now there’s no point. You’re another person who can’t see Zionists violence and you are dedicated to rewriting the history of Zionism.

Zionists did not “migrate legally,” they set up a colonial enterprise and colluded with the British to ethnically cleanse the Palestinians. They openly called themselves colonialists. They clearly wrote that their intention from the start was to ethnically cleanse the natives and they did. They also wrote extensively of plans for expansion, a desire for greater Israel, and the use of force to get it. This is all extensively documented and I’m not going to entertain anyone who thinks they can simply declare zionism as a nonviolent movement when ethnic cleansing and mass murder was always the goal based on European supremacist views.

[-]

cobcat@reddit

Suit yourself, but that framing has very little basis in facts. Yes, some Zionists said those things. But most Jews moving to Palestine were not colonizers, and even the ones you would call that didn't land there with weapons to displace the locals. No, they bought land from the Arabs living there and started living on it.

The VAST majority of Jews moving there were refugees that literally had nowhere else to go. But you don't really care about that, do you? It's much easier to call them evil, murderous colonizers. Who cares about what actually happened. Not you on your righteous crusade. It's sad, and people like you will only prolong this conflict. Goodbye

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

I’d ask which Zionist leaders weren’t colonialists, but I won’t bother. The overwhelming majority were, and while they “didn’t arrive with weapons,” that’s just an irrelevant framing to try and distract from reality. At the very stat of Zionism the goal was ethnic cleaning of non-Jews in Palestine. Herzl made that clear. There was no expectation by the majority of Zionists that they wouldn’t expel non-Jews . Then came the violence of the Jewish militias against the Palestinians, the brutal killings, the suppression of the Palestinian push for independence were all in line with that.

That fact that you can write “the Israelis aren’t the aggressors” when you know that almost all the European Jews who migrated thousands of miles did so explicitly to help expel Palestinians from their homes and set up their Jewish exclusivist state shows how bad faith you are and how bad faith Zionism is, because you are just repeating talking points that you know are lies and you don’t care that they are lies. It’s irrelevant to you. It’s all about pushing the narrative, no matter how false.

[-]

cobcat@reddit

There was no expectation by the majority of Zionists that they wouldn’t expel non-Jews . Then came the violence of the Jewish militias against the Palestinians, the brutal killings, the suppression of the Palestinian push for independence were all in line with that.

Yeah that's completely made up. Please look at the timeline of violence. The idea that Jews started violence against Palestinians is completely ridiculous and has absolutely no basis in fact: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_and_massacres_in_Mandatory_Palestine

That fact that you can write “the Israelis aren’t the aggressors” when you know that almost all the European Jews who migrated thousands of miles did so explicitly to help expel Palestinians from their homes and set up their Jewish exclusivist state

Again, complete nonsense. Jews were fleeing pogroms and had nowhere else to go. That was the primary motivation. Nobody thought it would be fun to move to Palestine to expel Arabs. Where do you come up with this bullshit?

repeating talking points that you know are lies and you don’t care that they are lies

It's a lie to point out that Jewish migration to Palestine happened because of pogroms and these people were refugees? That's just a fact. Show me a source that proves that they weren't refugees and just wanted to expel Arabs.

the vast majority of Jews moving there were refugees, but they moved there after the state was set up, not before

So you suddenly agree they were refugees? And the state was created in 1948. Most refugees arrived during the 20s and 30s and directly after the Holocaust. And yes, a lot of Arab countries expelled their Jews after 1948, even though they had nothing to do with Israel. These Jews don't have anywhere else to go either. So Israel is needed, yes?

But yeah, sure, telling the truth will prolong the conflict, but lying about Zionism and presenting it as a harmless movement that wanted peace and only accidentally expelled and mass murdered hundreds of thousands of Palestinians by design isn’t going to extend the conflict? Lying always helps.

You are not telling the truth, you spread lies that can be easily falsified, e.g. your claim that Jews started violence against Palestinians. They clearly did not.

Zionism wanted a state, just like so many other national movements at the time wanted a state. That's not inherently bad. Even the UN partition plan included no expulsion for Palestinians. They could all have stayed where they were, but they didn't want Jews to have a state. And many did stay, which is why Israel is 20 % Arab today.

The reason why people like you are prolonging the conflict is because you want Palestinians to fight for an unachievable goal. That doesn't help anyone. It doesn't matter what's fair. History isn't fair. Literally every single modern state is built on the corpses of other peoples, and has a long history of invasions, counterinvasions and massacres. If you applied your logic everywhere, then everyone would be fighting everyone else all the time.

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

Just wanted to point out that Zionists cannot see their own violence:

Please look at the timeline of violence. The idea that Jews started violence against Palestinians is completely ridiculous and has absolutely no basis in fact...

Expelling someone from their home and land of generations is violent. Impoverishing people is violent. Forcing penury on people is violent. But as your are the perpetrator not the victim you don’t see that.

[-]

cobcat@reddit

Expelling someone from their home and land of generations is violent.

Nobody was expelled. Buying land and then wanting to live on it is not expulsion my dude.

[-]

About defending settlers, why do want them to keep the lands and homes they stole if you're defending them?

[-]

cobcat@reddit

I'm not defending them, I'm saying that realistically they aren't going anywhere. Taking the land was wrong but that's done now. It's better to write it off and move on rather than keep fighting an unwinnable fight and lise even more land and innocent lives in the process.

History is full of land changing hands, this is no different.

[-]

Ala117@reddit

I'm not defending them, I'm saying that

They get to keep what they stole, quite the same thing.

taking the land was wrong but

you're okay with it regardless, hence why you're defending these ghouls.

It's better to write it off and move on rather than keep fighting an unwinnable fight and lise even more land and innocent lives in the process.

Even when this "moving on" results losing even more land and innocent lives regardless? "not defending them" my ass.

[-]

cobcat@reddit

They get to keep what they stole, quite the same thing.

Just like any other country in the history of the world. Would you prefer ethnically cleansing them because of something their parents did 60 years ago?

you're okay with it regardless, hence why you're defending these ghouls.

I'm not defending the settlers at all, but it's pointless to keep fighting for an impossible goal. Israel will never forcibly remove close to a million people and nobody can force them to do it. So what's the point? You can complain about Poland taking Prussian land and call them thieves, but it's not going to achieve anything.

Even when this "moving on" results losing even more land and innocent lives regardless? "not defending them" my ass.

How would accepting a peace deal do this? And what's your alternative? Never accept an "unfair" deal and fight a nuclear power forever?

[-]

Ala117@reddit

Would you prefer ethnically cleansing them

See? you are defending them, when they ethnically cleanse Palestinians it's fine by you but when suggesting that what doesn't belong to them return to who it does you cry "ethnic cleansing".

I'm not defending the settlers at all, but

in the end you are, hence why you add "but" every time you claim you're "not defending them".

How would accepting a peace deal do this?

Just look at the west bank and see your heroes' handiwork.

[-]

cobcat@reddit

See? you are defending them, when they ethnically cleanse Palestinians it's fine by you but when suggesting that what doesn't belong to them return to who it does you cry "ethnic cleansing".

When did I say that ethnically cleansing Palestinians is fine? Obviously it's not. Why don't you read what I wrote instead of projecting your Zionist boogeyman? But I'm asking you: do you watto ethnically cleanse these areas? And if you do, how are you planning to make Israel agree to that?

in the end you are, hence why you add "but" every time you claim you're "not defending them".

Accepting reality today is not the same as defending past actions.

Just look at the west bank and see your heroes' handiwork.

There is no peace deal in the West Bank. I'm saying there needs to be one so the occupation ends.

[-]

Ala117@reddit

When did I say that ethnically cleansing Palestinians is fine?

When you basically said that they don't get to return to what israel stole from them.

do you want to ethnically cleanse these areas?

"do you want to steal the money from those bank robbers?"

Accepting reality today is

Another word to defend an atrocity you're too afraid to be against if not on board for.

There is no peace deal in the West Bank

not like it'd stop israel from terrorizing and ethnically cleansing it if there was, and not like you'd not be against it. but nice of you to admit that you're okay with the settlers until there's a "peace deal".

[-]

cobcat@reddit

When you basically said that they don't get to return to what israel stole from them.

Yes, how is that ethnic cleansing? If anything, the ethnic cleansing happened 60 years ago. That's done. You shouldn't ethnically cleanse a million people today because their parents and grandparents did the same thing 60 years ago. Israel should pay compensation, but these people are not going to leave.

"do you want to steal the money from those bank robbers?"

Answer the question. So you want to ethnically cleanse everyone living in these settlements? Just say that you support this then. Seems like ethnic cleansing is fine as long as it targets the right people.

Another word to defend an atrocity you're too afraid to be against if not on board for.

Delulu.

not like it'd stop israel from terrorizing and ethnically cleansing it if there was, and not like you'd not be against it

Ok seems like this conversation has run its course. You don't seem to comprehend anything I'm saying, and you are fine with ethnic cleansing and genocide as long as it's Jews. Cool.

but nice of you to admit that you're okay with the settlers until there's a "peace deal".

pasher5620@reddit

I like how this conveniently ignores how this was in response to the Lehi terrorrist group murdering 5 people a few days earlier. Once again, Israel defenders will overlook Zionist crimes to paint Palestinians/arabs as a whole as savage barbarians who kill without any provocation by the Zionists themselves.

[-]

kjchowdhry@reddit

zionists and lying (through omission), name a better duo

Wait, hold that thought, I got some others:

zionists and stealing
zionists and cheating
zionists and extortion
zionists and raping
zionists and pedophilia
zionists and murder

It’s almost as if zionists thought “hey, how can we become the most awful, vile, hated scum of the earth?” and then refined it over decades

[-]

mr2600@reddit

Is this exclusive to “Zionists?”

What has this sub become?

Muslim’s, Christians, atheists and everyone else have done the same things.

Like this is literally an example you would see in a dictionary under “anti-Semitism”.

Why can’t people criticise Israel and Zionism without going the extreme and painting them as like the literal boogeymen?

[-]

kjchowdhry@reddit

Thanks for reminding me:

*zionists and whataboutism

[-]

pasher5620@reddit

It’s literally not lol. Stating the historical and modern fact of what they are known for doing and excusing is not antisemitism. All of the things that person listed, Zionists have been caught doing on video and then subsequently defended doing. Remember, this is the same country and same belief system that saw prison guards raping a child in prison and, when those guards were arrested, had people rioting until they were free. Now those guards go around bragging about what they did on TV. Rightfully criticizing Zionists for what they condone is not anti-semitism because Zionism isn’t Judaism.

[-]

Ala117@reddit

when did anybody do that?

[-]

mr2600@reddit

Read above comment?

[-]

Yes.

What about all the history before this? There's been conflict in that region non stop for all of recorded history.

Any more dumb questions?

Smart people ask dumb questions.

[-]

Juzziee@reddit

What about all the history before this

I'm sorry but you cant say "history before this" and point out 1947 as the original cause.

This conflict has been ongoing since the 1800s with the Ottoman Empire, rose in the 1900s during Nazi Germanys reign and has just boiled over since then.

We can't say for sure what started it, but the situation you're talking about was a result of already ongoing conflict due to the mass immigration of Jewish people, and the news of Britain wanting to partition Palestine into separate Arab and Jewish lands.

Now this isn't just a problem there, it just boiled over due to Britain making policies then leaving them to fight over it.

You see anti-immigration protests everywhere, Australia has them, America has them, UK has them, the only difference is when violence happens there, nobody stops it.

[-]

Lathariuss@reddit

Aside from a single war with Egypt around 1830, the region had seen no major conflicts for over 300 years since the Ottomans created their empire where the mamluks surrendered Jerusalem shortly after the initial battles.

Before that it was the crusades.

Before the crusades there were no major conflicts for about 400 years, since the area was peacefully surrendered by the byzantines to the muslims after a short siege who then invited christians and jews back into Jerusalem.

Byzantines had a couple wars with persians and romans during their rule

500+ years before that there was jewish revolts against romans who had control of it.

[-]

kjchowdhry@reddit

It all started when a bunch of European terrorists (aka leahy, haganah, irgun) started killing the people that welcomed them into their homes

[-]

BackseatCowwatcher@reddit

It all started when a bunch of European terrorists started killing the people that welcomed them into their homes

Ahem

The 1920 Nebi Musa riots or 1920 Jerusalem riots took place in the British-controlled part of Occupied Enemy Territory Administration from 4 to 7 April 1920 in and around the Old City of Jerusalem. Five Jews were killed and several hundred injured

on Sunday, 4 April 1920, 60,000–70,000 Arabs had congregated in the city square for the Nebi Musa festival, and groups had been attacking Jews in the Old City's alleys for over an hour.

A speech marked by anti-semitic rhetoric was delivered by Amin al-Husayni from the balcony of the Arab Club. Musa al-Husayni, his uncle, the mayor, was also with him and spoke from the municipal building's balcony in similar terms.

The editor of the newspaper Suriya al-Janubia (Southern Syria), Aref al-Aref, another Arab Club member, delivered a speech on horseback at the Jaffa Gate.

According to Benny Morris, he said "If we don't use force against the Jews, we will never be rid of them"

As a result of the riots, trust among the British, Jews, and Arabs eroded. One consequence was that the region's Jewish community increased moves towards an autonomous infrastructure and security apparatus parallel to that of the British administration.

The Jaffa riots (commonly known in Hebrew: מאורעות תרפ"א, romanized: Me'oraot Tarpa)[1] were a series of violent riots in Mandatory Palestine on May 1–7, 1921, which began as an attack by Arabs on Jews and then reprisal attacks by Jews on Arabs.

Dozens of British, Arab, and Jewish witnesses all reported that Arab men bearing clubs, knives, swords, and some pistols broke into Jewish buildings and murdered their inhabitants, while women followed to loot. They attacked Jewish pedestrians and destroyed Jewish homes and stores. They beat and killed Jews in their homes, including children, and in some cases split open the victims' skulls.

At 1:30 pm, an immigrant hostel run by the Zionist Commission and home to a hundred people who had arrived in recent weeks and days was attacked by the mob, and though the residents tried to barricade the gate, it was rammed open and Arabs attackers poured in. The stone-throwing was followed by bombs and gunfire, and the Jewish hostel residents hid in various rooms. When the police arrived, it was reported that they weren't shooting to disperse the crowd, but were actually aiming at the building. In the courtyard one immigrant was felled by a policeman's bullet at short-range, and others were stabbed and beaten with sticks. Five women fled a policeman firing his pistol; three escaped. A policeman cornered two women and tried to rape them, but they escaped him despite his shooting at them. A fourteen-year-old girl and some men managed to escape the building, but each was in turn chased down and beaten to death with iron rods or wooden boards.

On May 2, Jews in the Haganah began launching reprisal attacks on Arabs – the first of their kind.

Get your history right, the Palestinians massacred the Jews repeatedly first, simply because they were Jews, and eventually the Jews responded in the same terms.

They weren’t “welcomed into their homes”- they were beaten in the streets, robbed and worse.

[-]

Drab_Majesty@reddit

when the Zionists began smuggling other Zionists into Palestine

[-]

Gleneroo@reddit

They didn't start a war. They carried out a large-scale terrorist attack.

[-]

freexe@reddit

They are the government for Gaza. That's a war.

[-]

Gleneroo@reddit

Usually in history a terrorist attack isn't called starting a war.

Example US 9-11. They never said talibans started a war on them.

London bombings 2005 ( Al Qaeda) didn't say another country started a war on them.

IRA terrorist attacks, never said Ireland started a war.

And this goes on forever.

Of course military actions and even wars follow, and it is accurate to say the terrorist was an event leading to the war, but until now nobody said they were starting a war.

It looks only like vocabulary but the problem is that comes often as justification in some narrative:

they started a war (so what we are doing is justified, we are innocent, only defending, it is not our choice, etc)
it is the elected government of Gaza (leading to 'it's their choice', and then 'there are no innocents' )

[-]

BehemothDeTerre@reddit

Vocabulary or not, when the neighbour launches a terrorist attack against you and pledged to do it again and again, it's not a "narrative" to say that you're defending yourselves.
Doesn't matter if you call it "starting a war" or not.

Difference between London 2005 and Oct 7 is that Hamas is both a terrorist org and a government. AQ was only the former.

[-]

Gleneroo@reddit

I totally agree on your first point (I'll skip discussion on the second one).

As leader of a country, it is even a duty to your people to take whatever action is necessary. Perfectly agree.

We may differ on the means to that goal. I am fine with military action. I am even fine with justifiable unfortunate collateral damage because in real life that happens. Not with some actions like let's block the food for 100% of the population as it may benefit the 0.1% we are targeting, because that's no necessary.

[-]

freexe@reddit

Personally if a neighbouring country invaded my country and killed tens of thousands of people and took thousands of hostages (scaled up for a relative population) I want my country to obsoletely get those hostages back at any cost.

And I grew up through the IRA. They at least gave warnings and didn't directly attack people and they were fighting for something and peace was achieved via diplomatic means

[-]

BehemothDeTerre@reddit

Same here. I, too, object to some of the means Israël used in pursuing this war.

Doesn't sound like we really disagree, then. Good to see there are still some non pro-Hamas voices on A_T.

[-]

ijzerwater@reddit

as far as I recall Gaza was occupied at the time, so Israel was the government

[-]

Zipz@reddit

Hey help me out here

What date does this say the war started again?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_war

[-]

Sloppykrab@reddit

Ummm if I am capable of reading, it says the Gaza war started on the 7th of October 2023.

[-]

Drab_Majesty@reddit

Well we have now confirmed you are incapable.

fought as part of the unresolved Israeli–Palestinian and Gaza–Israel conflicts dating back to the 20th century.

[-]

Sloppykrab@reddit

The war began on 7 October 2023, when Hamas and other Palestinian militant groups launched a surprise attack on Israel, in which 1,195 Israelis and foreign nationals, including 815 civilians, were killed.

[-]

Lmfaoooo

Yes, I agree, that was the * actual* objective. But attached to that was convincing some gulf state to take all the Gazans, and this failed. And they lacked the international goodwill to simply murder 2m people.

So even on the unspoken actual objective they made a mess of it.

[-]

PLO is giving out Palestinian lands for Israeli settlers and they are Russian proxy, do you really want them in power? Also PLO has no military, it's main reason why IDF can do anything they want in west bank.

[-]

when did i let israel decide Palestinians' fate...?

[-]

axSupreme@reddit

So you want the fighting to continue until only one side is left? You’re aware there are people dying, who have zero interest in that lost cause?

You can assign blame as you like, but it’s time to give future generations of Palestinians a chance at a peaceful life. Realistic chance and not some idealistic suicide attempt.

[-]

dylphil@reddit

well you also can’t lose a war and think you’re entitled to make demands.

also, let’s be real - regardless of what Israel offers Hamas wouldn’t disarm. Just like Bibi, they care more about power than they do the people the govern

[-]

axeteam@reddit

Say for some reason, Hamas disarms and disbands. Without an armed group like Hamas, what is stopping the Israeli military from just rolling over the Palestinians? Even looking past war crimes, we see right now that the IDF is not exactly even keen on stopping violence from the so-called settlers. If these clashes don't stop, the next one will come sooner or later, and it is likely going to be even more radical than Hamas.

[-]

YourBestDream4752@reddit

I really dislike when people say “what’s stopping Israel from doing so and so” because, if they want to do that, why didn’t they do it before?

[-]

fcukou@reddit

Why didn't they do the thing they have been actively doing since 1948?

https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/s/o7f4NQz1gl

[-]

YourBestDream4752@reddit

What were the Palestinians up to that warranted an expanded and continuous Israeli presence in Palestine? It’s slipping my mind.

[-]

[-]

cmonnomorework@reddit

Great, hamas can surrender and end the war then.

Oh they won't surrender? Then the fighting will continue, which is great, every day idf eliminates a bunch of hamas!

[-]

DevA248@reddit

Just being brutally honest, your idea of "trading arms for international support" seems like the absolute worst idea that you could possibly take away from this.

What I find surprising is what makes so confident that this is "Gaza's best interest." Says who? Says you? I honestly doubt you are capable of making that judgment.

[-]

GameDoesntStop@reddit

Try thinking about this for more than 2 seconds.

[-]

DevA248@reddit

I always find it funny how genocidal Zionists pretend to be serious thinkers on this subject.

[-]

Vladxxl@reddit

It's either this or more of the same. This cycle keeps happening where Palestinians try to attack Israel they then get attacked back and lose. The international community then comes up with a deal and people like you say "well it isn't perfect and nothing stops Israel from attacking again" return to step 1.

[-]

Glif13@reddit

I don't see Hamas succeeding at stopping Israel. Today Israel wouldn't even be in Gaza if it were not for October 7 — it was not in Gaza before.

The defeat of the evil colonist apartheid regime and an end to its terror on natives.

That already happened when the "evil colonist apartheid regime" started a war to commit genocide on the natives in 1948 because the UN gave said natives their own state, and they lost said war.

South Africa was never disarmed by a foreign power. The SADF simply integrated militia and Bantustan military groups into the SANDF, with their nukes being disarmed by the white government prior to the end of Apartheid.

Also, ‘surrender to humanity?’ What broad generic idea of ‘humanity’ is going to take away the IDF’s guns and tanks?

[-]

platp@reddit

Also, ‘surrender to humanity?’ What broad generic idea of ‘humanity’ is going to take away the IDF’s guns and tanks?

Why is this question important? What is important is Israel will be unable to continue being an apartheid and terrorizing the natives of Palestine.

South Africa was never disarmed by a foreign power.

South Africa was forced to bow down to the demands of humanity.

The SADF simply integrated militia and Bantustan military groups into the SANDF

The control of the army was given to South Africans and not just racial supremacists. That is much more than just a name change.

But I agree that the justice in dismantling of South Africa was very weak. Let's do better this time.

[-]

TearOpenTheVault@reddit

Why is this question important?

Because the only way Israel will disarm is if: 1. It believes it's not threatened by any other state in the region (never going to happen.) 2. It's forced to disarm by an outside actor that capitulates it. (Difficult, as Israel has nukes.)

You can't just say 'Israel will surrender to humanity' when 'humanity' can't force a country to get rid of their weapons.

The control of the army was given to South Africans and not just racial supremacists. That is much more than just a name change.

Notice how that's not disarmament in any way, shape or form. The only disarmament South Africa went through was when their military industry was so unfathomably corrupt that they needed to completely rehaul their acquisitions process.

I'm asking you for actual, practical ways to get the result you want out of this, and your only answer is to vaguely gesture to a non-existent force and claim it'll do the job.

Serbia wasn't dissuaded from cleansing the Bosniaks because of 'humanity,' it was because Nato dropped a shitload of bombs on them.

[-]

platp@reddit

It's forced to disarm by an outside actor that capitulates it.

Humanity will do this. Israel cannot exist as a pariah. And it will become one once the western countries can't shield it from humanity.

Notice how that's not disarmament in any way, shape or form. The only disarmament South Africa went through was when their military industry was so unfathomably corrupt that they needed to completely rehaul their acquisitions process.

You brought disarmament not me. I was talking about dismantlement. A newly found Palestinian state can take up the arms of the terror colony. That is not a problem.

Serbia wasn't dissuaded from cleansing the Bosniaks because of 'humanity,' it was because Nato dropped a shitload of bombs on them.

Yeah, once Israel is isolated from the world, some form of military by humanity can defeat them. Only because of the West Israel still continues its evil.

You want me to predict the future in precision. Whatever I predict will inevitably sound unprobable because it all is. But one of the possibilities of the future will become reality. The vagueness you see is just predicting as little I need to predict and not trying to guess every little thing. Israel becoming a pariah is not just one of the possibilities, it is the only way for a fair world in the future therefore it is a must humanity needs to accomplish. How that will happen exactly, I do not know. There probably is thousands of scenarios of that happening but you want me to point to a single one so you can strawman my current argument. Which is that one of the possibilities will happen, not necessarily a specific one.

[-]

TearOpenTheVault@reddit

A newly found Palestinian state can take up the arms of the terror colony. That is not a problem.

I suspect it might be for the Jews living in the Levant.

Humanity will do this.

Oh so we're just making up what would happen in a fantasyland where everything goes perfectly. I too would love for world peace and the world to be made out of pudding, but unfortunately we live on Earth.

[-]

GothicGolem29@reddit

I also note they seem to think a military can force Israel to dismand despite them having nukes....

[-]

platp@reddit

I suspect it might be for the Jews living in the Levant.

You suspect wrong then. Jews lived in Levant for hundreds of years before the zionists came to colonize it.

Oh so we're just making up what would happen in a fantasyland where everything goes perfectly. I too would love for world peace and the world to be made out of pudding, but unfortunately we live on Earth.

You close your eyes to what will happen. People are already protesting and acting against the terror colony. What would you call the coalition of those people siding with humanity, if not calling them humanity?

[-]

TearOpenTheVault@reddit

Jews lived in Levant for hundreds of years before the zionists came to colonize it.

The part you're missing is 'as second class citizens, subject to the whims of the Ottoman empire with fewer rights and protections than the various Muslim-majority groups around them.

Anywya, I'm done here. This is just a back-and-forth 'what if the world was made of pudding' at this point.

[-]

platp@reddit

The part you're missing is 'as second class citizens, subject to the whims of the Ottoman empire with fewer rights and protections than the various Muslim-majority groups around them.

They lived under the protection of Ottomans. They had the right to use their own rules between themselves. They paid a tax because they didn't contribute to the defense with their lives.

It is interesting that you implied they would be killed without arms yet when confronted they had lived there peacefully without massacres like zionists do now, you say they were second class citizens. You do know that muslims and jews were massacred in the Reconquista right? And you must know that no muslim communities in Europe at the time was because Europe was not accepting muslims with any rights whatsoever. Yet you complain jews had different set of rights under muslim rule. Ridiculous argument all around.

[-]

GothicGolem29@reddit

some form of military

What's crazy about comparing two heavily militarised countries who invaded and kept a population under occupation due to their belief that the other is a "fake" state on "their" rightful land that they need for Lebensraum for the entire diaspora of their chosen ethnic group, then committed genocide and completely destroyed entire cities in response to armed resistance?

Especially when those countries both had soldiers trained to believe that [Hitler] was the most correct person there ever was, and was correct in every word he said.

[-]

platp@reddit

Why is that? I know ww2 Germans didn't fully know the genocide they did but Israelis do know the genocide they are doing. But they are still comparable.

[-]

BehemothDeTerre@reddit

Well, at least you're honest about your lyst for genocide. Most of thevothers try to hide it.

[-]

Ax_deimos@reddit

How many proxy armies did Israel have to go after over the past 2 years since Hamas went on it's murderous little adventure on Oct 7 2023?

Why do you assume that Hamas are "evil, selfish people" because they don't surrender to their Israeli genocidaires?

Hamas are not unique. Some of the other Palestinian factions (e.g., PIJ) took a more hardline stance against surrendering arms. Because when has surrendering arms to a genocidal oppressor ever worked out in history?

Sabra and Shatila or Fatah in the West Bank, historically the surrendering of arms gives Israel a free pass to attack and aggress more. There is no example from history (not just Palestinian history) where surrendering to the genocidaires stopped the genocide.

[-]

Quick-Exit-5601@reddit

I have explained why I think hamas are selfish and evil. From my perspective, what they are trying to do is to cling onto power at any costs. One of the main reasons why Israel even suggested ceasefire was because the criticism grew too loud. Even people who initially were pro-israel, changed their mind.

Israelis knew that if they keep going they may achieve their goal, but they will lose a lot of international support by doing so. I am not saying it's the west who stopped genocide that was taking place, but let's be honest, it wasn't rich Arab states.

But what happened to hamas and in gaza in general was a display of overwhelming force and military domination. Any sensible leader would step down if it meant protecting his people. That's what Japanese did after Hiroshima, that's how Warsaw fell after the uprising, this is why Germany capitulated after Dresden was bombed.

Palestinians deserve a leadership that actually cares about them and their wellbeing. Hamas doesn't care about Palestinians, at all. They have made it clear that any Palestinian life lost to this war doesn't mean anything to them. The least they could do is step down and let Palestinians choose new leaders.

[-]

alt-right-del@reddit

I guess with the history of the Jews in Poland in 2nd world war you expect that Palestinians would show the same behaviour and let Israel take care of their “future”? How did it work out for those Jews?

Palestinians will fight to the end for their sovereignty and self determination, they have a perfect example of what happens if they “surrender” to Israel in the Westbank

[-]

cobcat@reddit

West Bank Palestinians have pretty much the best lives out of any Arab in the entire Arab world. Yes, the settlers suck. But West Bank Palestinians are doing better than their neighbors on basically every metric. Qnd do we see a genocide in the West Bank? No we do not.

And that's despite refusing to sign a peace deal. Clearly, the West Bank is doing far FAR better than Gaza. So between giving up arms and choosing to fight, it seems pretty obvious what the better choice is.

[-]

ijzerwater@reddit

Qnd do we see a genocide in the West Bank? No we do not.

every few days I see news of colonists terrorizing Palestinians on West Bank and belongings destroyed. Every few months I see Israel extending its colonies. As it is, there is no future for Palestinians in West Bank.

[-]

cobcat@reddit

They could just agree to a peace deal. They won't, but they could. As it stands, nobody is even advocating for a reasonable peace deal on the Palestinian side.

And yet, Palestinians are by and large doing better than all other Arab countries. How come, if Israel is so awful?

[-]

ijzerwater@reddit

that were the Oslo accords, but those only led to more colonies

[-]

cobcat@reddit

The Oslo accords were never fully implemented because Hamas started a bombing campaign.

[-]

ijzerwater@reddit

Less than six months after the signing of the DOP, an Israeli extremist killed 29 Palestinians in the Cave of the Patriarchs massacre.[5] In response...

[-]

cobcat@reddit

That was one guy. In response, Hamas started a huge bombing campaign.

Recognize Palestinians state...

There is no Palestinian state today. There's nothing to recognize.

[-]

ijzerwater@reddit

There is no Palestinian state today. There's nothing to recognize.

Yes, by systematic action of Israel to make that impossible

[-]

cobcat@reddit

Dude Palestinians could have had a state all the way back in 1948.

[-]

ijzerwater@reddit

is that before or after Plan Dalet?

Plan Dalet (Hebrew: תוכנית ד', Tokhnit dalet "Plan D") was a Zionist military plan executed during the 1948 Palestine war for the conquest of territory in Mandatory Palestine in preparation for the establishment of a Jewish state. The plan was the blueprint for Israel's military operations starting in March 1948 until the end of the war in early 1949, and so played a central role in the 1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight known as the Nakba.[1]

[-]

cobcat@reddit

That would never have happened had Arabs not loudly announced that they were going to attack and throw the Jews into the ocean the second the British left.

[-]

ijzerwater@reddit

a defensible position towards land thiefs

[-]

cobcat@reddit

Nobody had their land stolen. And you can't have it both ways. Either say the Jews were the aggressors, or say that Arabs were justified trying to genocide the Jews. Pick one.

[-]

ijzerwater@reddit

first Palestinians were living there, now they cannot live there any more. It was stolen.

at what point did Palestinians trying to genocide Jews?

[-]

cobcat@reddit

first Palestinians were living there, now they cannot live there any more. It was stolen.

Nobody had their land stolen when Arabs attacked in 1947.

at what point did Palestinians trying to genocide Jews?

All throughout the 20s and 30s, then in 1947, and then again in 1967 and 1973. Do you even know anything about this conflict that isn't straight up Palestinian propaganda?

[-]

ijzerwater@reddit

so, defending against invaders is genocide now.

any more lies you want to share?

[-]

cobcat@reddit

so, defending against invaders is genocide now.

Who invaded? Jews were already living there for 70 years.

next to the lies you want to share?

Please name one thing I lied about.

[-]

ijzerwater@reddit

in 1967 the six days war was started by Israel yes you make it a genocide attempt by Palestinians

[-]

cobcat@reddit

in 1967 the six days war was started by Israel yet you make it a genocide attempt by Palestinians

This is such a tired and nonsensical talking point. The 1967 war was started by Arabs, it was a repeat attempt of 1948. Yes, Israel fired the first shot because they believed that's the only way they could survive. But it's complete nonsense to claim that Israel started the war.

Also, since you bring up 1967 and skip over 1948, do you acknowledge that 5 Arab armies attacked Israel with the intent to genocide the Jews? Because that definitely was the motivation.

[-]

ijzerwater@reddit

This is such a tired and nonsensical talking point.

doubling down on lies does not make them true

1948 was to oppose creation of Israel which is not genocide by a long way

[-]

cobcat@reddit

1948 was to oppose creation of Israel which is not genocide by a long way

There is ample evidence that that's exactly what it was: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/s/jAE5fvcIsK

[-]

ijzerwater@reddit

I am sure there is hasbara stating that

[-]

cobcat@reddit

Is everything you don't like Hasbara? Must be nice living in your black and white world where there's only evil colonizers and innocent victims.

[-]

Ropetrick6@reddit

Why are you brushing over the atrocities of the Zionists? Why are you brushing over the fact that they literally imported Nazi guns in preparation of ethnically cleansing Palestinians? Why are you brushing over the express intention of wiping out Palestinians that the Zionists had?

[-]

cobcat@reddit

Why are you brushing over the atrocities of the Zionists?

Zionist terror groups started in the late 30s. I don't want to defend their actions but they were very much a response to Palestinian violence, not the other way around.

Why are you brushing over the fact that they literally imported Nazi guns in preparation of ethnically cleansing Palestinians?

You understand that Israel bought weapons precisely because they knew they would have to defend themselves, yes? Arabs had been killing Jews for 30 years at that point.

Why are you brushing over the express intention of wiping out Palestinians that the Zionists had?

They didn't do that though. Why not? Even today, 20 % of Israel is Arab. 0 % of Palestinian territories are Jewish.

[-]

Ropetrick6@reddit

Zionist terror groups started well before the 30's. The Haganah terrorists and war criminals, for instance, were formed in 1920, and was nowhere near the first Zionist terror group to target Palestinian civilians. And considering the fact that they explicitly wanted to ethnically cleanse Palestinians from Palestine, no, they were not a response, they were a cause.

Also, please tell me what part of the Safsaf massacre was defensive. Was it the murdering innocent civilians? Was it the theft of homes and property? Was it the rape of children? Because none of those things sound particularly defensive, and all of them sound even more atrocious when you realize THEY IMPORTED NAZI GUNS WITH THE EXPRESS INTENTION OF USING THEM FOR THIS PURPOSE.

An ethnostate is still an ethnostate, no matter how it tries to rebrand itself. Why do you support ethnonationalism and supremacist movements?

[-]

cobcat@reddit

Zionist terror groups started well before the 30's.

They didn't. Provide sources. You cannot.

The Haganah terrorists and war criminals, for instance, were formed in 1920

The Haganah did not start out as a terror group. When did they commit their first terror attack?

considering the fact that they explicitly wanted to ethnically cleanse Palestinians from Palestine, no, they were not a response, they were a cause.

Source? Because that's just a lie. They were created to protect Jewish settlements from Arab attacks and only switched to terrorism later. It's not a good luck if you just spout obvious lies. In fact, it undermines your entire cause, because if you lie about something so obvious, why should anyone trust anything else you say?

Also, please tell me what part of the Safsaf massacre was defensive

None, it was a war crime.

THEY IMPORTED NAZI GUNS WITH THE EXPRESS INTENTION OF USING THEM FOR THIS PURPOSE.

They bought weapons to defend themselves. It was Arabs who attacked them in 1947. This is just a historical fact. You can say that the Arabs were justified in doing so, and I somewhat agree with that, but again: if you spout obvious lies it just hurts your own cause.

An ethnostate is still an ethnostate, no matter how it tries to rebrand itself.

Great, so we should oppose a Palestinian ethnostate then?

Why do you support ethnonationalism and supremacist movements?

I don't. I support the Jewish right to self-determination, just like I support the Palestinian right to self-determination.

[-]

Ropetrick6@reddit

Please tell me when you think that they stopped being defensive and started being terrorists, because to everybody but you, it looks like they were terrorists since the start.

[-]

cobcat@reddit

The first Zionist terror attack was committed by Irgun in 1937. Lehi and Haganah started in 1942 and 1948 respectively.

But please, provide evidence of these other terror attacks you claim before then. You cannot because they don't exist. For decades, violence in Palestine was almost exclusively committed by Arabs against Jews, starting with the Jaffa riots in 1921.

You should really learn about the history of this conflict instead of spreading easily falsified lies.

[-]

Ropetrick6@reddit

Read the Hundred Years War on Palestine, it's got the answer to your question.

[-]

cobcat@reddit

Right, so you cannot provide any evidence right now? Is it going to a different school?

[-]

Ropetrick6@reddit

I can't be bothered to waste my time on someone spouting historical revisionism. If you actually care to be informed on the matter you're speaking about, you'll read the book. If you don't care, you won't. I can't force you to be informed, so the choice is solely yours.

[-]

cobcat@reddit

I can't be bothered to waste my time on someone spouting historical revisionism.

Hahahaha. You can't provide a single source for your claims but accuse me of revisionism. That's funny. I'm aware of the book by the way, but haven't read all of it. It certainly doesn't contain any evidence for Jewish terrorism before 1937. Because you made that up.

[-]

Ropetrick6@reddit

Guess you don't care to be informed, got it.

[-]

Ropetrick6@reddit

The Hamas that Israel supported? That Hamas?

[-]

cobcat@reddit

Israel supported Hamas when the PLO was doing the bombing and Hamas was peaceful. You like glossing over that fact, don't you?

[-]

Ropetrick6@reddit

Israel also murders civilians and rapes children, but you like glossing over that fact.

Under international law, resistance against occupation is justified and legal. If you don't like resistance, maybe you should stop being occupiers.

[-]

cobcat@reddit

Terrorism is not resistance. I don't have any problem with Hamas fighting the IDF according to international law. I have no problem with settlers getting attacked. I do have a problem with killing a thousand innocent people.

If you don't like resistance, maybe you should stop being occupiers.

I agree the occupation should end. Palestinians should have signed any of the deals to end it.

[-]

Ropetrick6@reddit

Zionists should never have started their occupation to begin with.

And why are you continuing to gloss over the fact that Israel murders civilians and rapes children?

[-]

cobcat@reddit

Zionists should never have started their occupation to begin with

Sure, and Arabs shouldn't have attacked in 1967. Agreed?

And why are you continuing to gloss over the fact that Israel murders civilians and rapes children?

Well if "Israel" does that, then so does "Palestine". Looks like we are tied on that. But you know that Israel doesn't actually support this, which is why rapists are prosecuted. Not nearly enough, but still. In Gaza, these criminals are celebrated.

[-]

Ropetrick6@reddit

If Israel doesn't support the murder of civilians and rape of children, why do they celebrate war criminals and child rapists? Why does the Nakba law exist to silence anybody trying to point out their atrocities? Why have they been continuously electing, protecting, and celebrating the people who commit or endorse these atrocities for the past 8 decades? Why have they been violating the Geneva Convention and international law on a daily basis since 1947?

[-]

cobcat@reddit

If Israel doesn't support the murder of civilians and rape of children, why do they celebrate war criminals and child rapists?

They don't. If you are referring to Sde Taiman, the perpetrators have been convicted and jailed.

Why does the Nakba law exist to silence anybody trying to point out their atrocities?

Because right wingers are gonna right wing? I don't agree with it. But hey, maybe instead going "What about X? What about Y?", maybe try engaging with my actual point. Because you are just jumping from one thing to another since you can't seem to address any of my points with actual arguments.

Why have they been continuously electing, protecting, and celebrating the people who commit or endorse these atrocities for the past 8 decades?

LOL! Barak, Olmert, Peres, Rabin. You don't really know much about Israel, do you?

Why have they been violating the Geneva Convention and international law on a daily basis since 1947?

In what way have they done that? Or did you mix things up and are you talking about the illegal attack on Israel by 5 neighboring Arab countries with clear genocidal intent in 1948, and again in 1967? Going by what you've said so far, I understand you are not the most knowledgeable person regarding Israel/Palestine so I understand if it gets confusing sometimes.

[-]

Ropetrick6@reddit

If you genuinely think that those are the only people I'm talking about, then it's well beyond my capabilities to help you at this point.

Anywho, just a friendly reminder that Jacob Israel de Haan wasn't a Hamas militant.

[-]

cobcat@reddit

it's well beyond my capabilities to help you at this point.

Well that much is clear.

[-]

Ropetrick6@reddit

It's beyond anybody's, there's no helping you in general.

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

What would this peace deal look like? Netanyahu is in record as opposing a Palestinian state, and there was recently a vote in the Knesset saying that there would be no Palestinian state. It passed overwhelmingly.

Who would Palestinians reach a peace deal with? Not Israelis - they’ve been saying they want peace but showing that they want expansion for the entire life of Israel.

[-]

cobcat@reddit

What would this peace deal look like?

A sovereign Palestinian state roughly within the current borders, with Israeli security guarantees that get removed gradually if the peace holds.

Netanyahu is in record as opposing a Palestinian state

Netanyahu will not survive the next election.

there was recently a vote in the Knesset saying that there would be no Palestinian state. It passed overwhelmingly.

Because there is a war on and Israel does not want a repeat of October 7. And the bigger problem is that there is no believable peace movement that has any legitimacy among Palestinians.

Not Israelis - they’ve been saying they want peace but showing that they want expansion for the entire life of Israel.

That's just nonsensical projection. Israel offered deals repeatedly. If Palestinians at least wanted a deal, that would change everything. Currently, not even left wing Israelis believe that peace is possible any more. That needs to change.

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

bobcat:

A sovereign Palestinian state roughly within the current borders, with Israeli security guarantees that get removed gradually if the peace holds.

That is absurdly non-specific. What happens to the half a million settlers? Do the Palestinians get East Jerusalem? RoR? Compensation? What security guarantees? Will it have full independence? Full control over borders, air space, spectrum, foreign relations, trade, natural resources and water? Or does Israel maintain control of all of them forever? What if the Israeli government decides to keep the occupation going? What recourse do the Palestinian have? Hopes and prayers?

Exactly which political parties likely to be in power at the next election will support this in a coalition? Because I don’t see more than a dozen MKs supporting this. Everyone from Yes Atid to the far right would be against this.

Netanyahu will not survive the next election.

lol. He has been PM for most of the last 30 years. I am in no way confident he will get voted out. Ariel Sharon was made PM because he was a war criminal. Netanyahu can finally one-up him: genocide.

Because there is a war on and Israel does not want a repeat of October 7.

And the excuse for the last 6 decades?

And the bigger problem is that there is no believable peace movement that has any legitimacy among Palestinians.

He he. Destroy or weaken all parties that want peace, bolster the extremists, then say there is no one to make peace with.

You’ve convinced me - Israel will never willingly let a Palestinian state exist.

That's just nonsensical projection. Israel offered deals repeatedly. If Palestinians at least wanted a deal, that would change everything. Currently, not even left wing Israelis believe that peace is possible any more. That needs to change.

What deals? Ehud Barak’s non-contiguous bantustans? George Bush’s Roadmap to Peace that Ariel Sharon rejected? Or was it Netanyahu’s peace offering to Abbas, which was [checks notes] nothing at all…

[-]

cobcat@reddit

That is absurdly non-specific.

It's very specific.

What happens to the half a million settlers?

Nothing. It's too late to evict that many people.

Do the Palestinians get East Jerusalem?

No.

Compensation?

Yes, there should be compensation.

What security guarantees?

Exact details tbd, but likely Israeli border checks, airspace control and a couple strategic bases.

spectrum, foreign relations, trade, natural resources and water?

No.

What if the Israeli government decides to keep the occupation going?

The occupation would end as soon as the agreement is signed, likely with a transition period. If Israel doesn't honor the agreement, then Palestinians will have lost nothing and Israel will lose support from people like me.

What recourse do the Palestinian have?

What recourse do they have now? Absolutely none.

Exactly which political parties likely to be in power at the next election will support this in a coalition?

This will take YEARS to implement. My point is that Palestinians need to be open to such a deal to begin with. Otherwise things will just get worse and worse for them. More settlements, more death.

And the excuse for the last 6 decades?

Mainly Palestinian intransigence.

Destroy or weaken all parties that want peace, bolster the extremists, then say there is no one to make peace with.

You’ve convinced me - Israel will never willingly let a Palestinian state exist.

In your world, do Palestinians have any agency at all? Or are they all mind-controlled by the Joos?

What deals?

Taba and the Olmert offer were solid. Oslo was good. Pre 1967 was good. The original partition plan was good.

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

Just to be sure I get this right, the settlements deep in the West Bank would remain part of Israel, the Palestinian state is just whatever is left over, and East Jerusalem is part of Israel, no RoR, and Palestinian borders, air space, spectrum, natural resources etc are controlled by Israel for just as long as Israel wants to? How is that different to what the West Bank is now?

[-]

cobcat@reddit

The vast majority of settlements are close to the Israeli border. These will stay where they are. Nobody will dismantle them. The smaller ones within Palestinian territory should be dismantled. Is that unreasonable?

the Palestinian state is just whatever is left over, and East Jerusalem is part of Israel, no RoR, and Palestinian borders, air space

Yes. That's the reality of the situation.

spectrum, natural resources etc are controlled by Israel for just as long as Israel wants to?

I already said no to this.

How is that different to what the West Bank is now?

It would no longer be occupied. That's the biggest issue. It would be under Palestinian civilian authority. But yes, I don't think this would actually work, because Hamas would immediately take over and start attacking Israel.

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

It would still be occupied, it would just be called something else. Israelis would still roam the West Bank killing Palestinians, Israel would still impoverish the Palestinians by restricting what they are allowed to have and do, a literal captive market that has to buy second hand crap and pay exorbitant prices while working for Israeli companies only to boost economic capture.

The obvious counter-proposal, which I fully support and have done for a while is no Palestinian state, settlements and settlers stay exactly where they are and this is all resolved peacefully.

[-]

cobcat@reddit

It would still be occupied, it would just be called something else. Israelis would still roam the West Bank killing Palestinians, Israel would still impoverish the Palestinians by restricting what they are allowed to have and do, a literal captive market that has to buy second hand crap and pay exorbitant prices while working for Israeli companies only to boost economic capture.

Why?

The obvious counter-proposal, which I fully support and have done for a while is no Palestinian state, settlements and settlers stay exactly where they are and this is all resolved peacefully.

How would it be resolved peacefully?

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

A one state solution. Palestinians become full citizens, no one moves, no settlements destroyed, compensation and correction of past injustices is made.

[-]

cobcat@reddit

Neither side wants a one state solution, and such a state would descend into civil war immediately. Imagine what Hamas would do if they had free and open access to Israeli civilians. We saw this during the second intifada.

That is a complete lie. The IDF kill babies and children with impunity. They shoot journalists and US and other western citizens attempting to protect Palestinian farmers without hesitation and with complete impunity. There are multiple videos of the IDF giving settlers weapons to shoot Palestinians. There are even more showing the IDF watching settlers brutally attack and beat Palestinian, ready to intervene and kill the Palestinians house they fight back.

The fact that you call the victims of Israel ‘terrorists’ and deserving of their fate is just another facet of your support for the settlers and hatred of the Palestinians. You literally hate Palestinians so much you can’t imagine a world where you’re not allowed to keep hurting and killing them.

[-]

cobcat@reddit

The IDF kill babies and children with impunity. They shoot journalists and US and other western citizens attempting to protect Palestinian farmers without hesitation and with complete impunity.

Stop drinking the kool aid.

There are multiple videos of the IDF giving settlers weapons to shoot Palestinians. There are even more showing the IDF watching settlers brutally attack and beat Palestinian, ready to intervene and kill the Palestinians house they fight back.

Yes, that happens and these people are scum. But the vast majority of deaths in the West Bank are not like that.

The fact that you call the victims of Israel ‘terrorists’

I call terrorists terrorists. Hamas are terrorists.

You literally hate Palestinians so much you can’t imagine a world where you’re not allowed to keep hurting and killing them.

Nice projection, but I don't hate Palestinians at all. I want the occupation to end and Palestinians to have a state. But they lost the overall conflict and will not get the 1967 borders back. It just won't happen. I don't want more innocents to die chasing this impossible goal. They need to accept defeat and move on.

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

cobcat:

Stop drinking the kool aid.

What a strange way to say you know I’m right, but you don’t want to admit it because you support the atrocities.

Yes, that happens and these people are scum. But the vast majority of deaths in the West Bank are not like that.

The vast majority of deaths are like that. They just aren’t reported accurately. Shireen Abu Akleh was shot in the neck by an IDF sniper who was bored. Hamas was blamed. Mohammed Tamimi was shot in the head by an IDF soldier who also wounded his father. The IDF then stole the body and lied, saying it was a Hamas attack. Tamimi was 2 years old. Laila al-Khatib was shot in the head and died instantly. She was also two years old. The IDF says it is investigating. The IDF shot a plumber, a 17 year old going to school and an 11 year old going for ice cream in the same month. The only reason given was “they looked suspicious.”

Protesters are routinely shot. So are bystanders documenting it. US citizens like Ayşenur Eygi and Rachel Corrie. IDF troops even bound and gagged an 80 year old Palestinian American before beating him to death, all because he talked back to them. In all these cases and thousands more there was no punishment, no charges, not even a real acknowledgement of any wrongdoing by the IDF.

This is what you support being done to the Palestinians until they capitulate.

I call terrorists terrorists. Hamas are terrorists.

The vast majority of those killed are not terrorists. You are claiming all those innocent civilians are terrorists simply because the IDF killed them.

Nice projection, but I don't hate Palestinians at all. I want the occupation to end and Palestinians to have a state. But they lost the overall conflict and will not get the 1967 borders back. It just won't happen. I don't want more innocents to die chasing this impossible goal. They need to accept defeat and move on.

That’s not even remotely plausible. You paint all the IDF’s victims as terrorists, you “oppose” the settlements but support them remaining there continuing to expand, and you support Palestinians being stripped of all human rights and being brutalised until they capitulate. I’m guessing that you, like almost all Zionists, also oppose the IDF soldiers who kill Palestinian civilians being punished for it.

You know what the really sad thing is? This is just a tiny fraction of the violence. All the beatings, denial of basic rights, ethnic cleansing, destruction of property, acts of terror, and dehumanisation that Israelis indulge in routinely that doesn’t result in the death of a Palestinian doesn’t get a mention in Israeli newspapers. Israelis don’t care that some in the IDF steal children’s bikes for fun, or arrest five year olds just to scare them, or sexually harass fourteen year old girls, or block kids going to and from school just to mess with them, or a million other things that are well documented. Israelis think Palestinians deserve what the IDF fired to them. And you support that happening until the Palestinians capitulate. It’s vile.

[-]

cobcat@reddit

What a strange way to say you know I’m right, but you don’t want to admit it because you support the atrocities.

Stop projecting. It doesn't make you look good. Nothing I said indicates I support atrocities against anyone.

The vast majority of deaths are like that.

They are not. You know these names because they are the exception. Any innocent death is awful, but the vast majority of deaths are from clashes between the IDF and violent protesters or militants in the West Bank. And importantly, the best way for these deaths to end is for the occupation to end, which is my point.

The vast majority of those killed are not terrorists.

I didn't even claim they were all terrorists. I said they were militants fighting the IDF. That doesn't make them terrorists. But there are terrorists too. And these deaths won't stop as long as the occupation persists. If you throw rocks at soldiers they are always going to shoot back. The only way to stop that is by getting the soldiers out of there.

you “oppose” the settlements but support them remaining there continuing to expand

The large settlements are simply not going away. There's almost a million people living there. This just won't happen. It doesn't matter if you support them or not, that's just reality. And if there's a peace deal, then you'll have agreed upon borders, and the settlements cannot expand like they currently do.

you support Palestinians being stripped of all human rights and being brutalised until they capitulate

More projection. Where did I say any of this?

I’m guessing that you, like almost all Zionists, also oppose the IDF soldiers who kill Palestinian civilians being punished for it.

I want all IDF soldiers who commit war crimes to be prosecuted. But that's not very likely to happen, so the better solution is to get them out.

Israelis think Palestinians deserve what the IDF fired to them. And you support that happening until the Palestinians capitulate. It’s vile.

It's realistically the only way out. Israel won the war and Palestinians refuse to accept it. That perpetuates the conflict forever. Israel will not be militarily defeated, and nobody can pressure a country into accepting existential threats. If Israel were isolated more, they would just care even less about international opinion and become only more brutal. They would have to. History is hardly ever fair.

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

cobcat:

Stop projecting. It doesn't make you look good. Nothing I said indicates I support atrocities against anyone.

I stated well-known facts that even you can't dispute, and you called it "drinking the kool aid." If you don't support the atrocities, why deny the truth? And everyone knows the IDF kills babies and children with impunity. It's always dressed up as "accidents," usually after lies that it was Hamas, or that Hamas was hiding behind them, or Hamas was nearby, or whatever absurdly stupid lie they feel they can push.

Do you want sources? There are hundreds of cases from the last few years, all in the West Bank, all from Israeli newspapers.

They are not. You know these names because they are the exception. Any innocent death is awful, but the vast majority of deaths are from clashes between the IDF and violent protesters or militants in the West Bank. And importantly, the best way for these deaths to end is for the occupation to end, which is my point.

That's not even remotely true. Every non-violent demonstration is classed as a riot by the IDF, and lethal force is applied. Every. Single. One. Funerals are often shot up. If the expectation at every funeral is that the IDF will kill someone else then why exactly is that?

You keep saying you support peace, yet everything that Israelis do you defend and, when I push back, get really angry about. It really is that one-sided in the West Bank. It really is unrelenting violence and killing. "Westworld for Jews" as one guy put it.

It's realistically the only way out. Israel won the war and Palestinians refuse to accept it. That perpetuates the conflict forever. Israel will not be militarily defeated, and nobody can pressure a country into accepting existential threats.

This is the usual plea to keep the status quo forever. No population is composed of 100% pacifists that do not in any way ever fight back, yet Israelis and their supporters expect Palestinians to be violently attacked and never fight back. If they fight back then they don't want peace. No attempt is made to stop Israeli settlers or the IDF from being violent.

If Israel were isolated more, they would just care even less about international opinion and become only more brutal. They would have to. History is hardly ever fair.

LOL. Israelis have been pushing that lie for decades. South Africa tried it and collapsed within a few years of BDS starting to bite. The same will happen with Israel. Nothing else will drive it to peace. Even you, who wants peace, just proposes what has happened before that led to the horrendous situation we have now.

[-]

cobcat@reddit

I stated well-known facts that even you can't dispute

No you didn't. You are spreading propaganda. Yes, there is a lot of unjustified violence in the West Bank. Nobody disputes that. Occupations are often awful for the occupied side. That's why the occupation should end with a peace deal.

Your claim that Israel is killing babies for fun is ridiculous propaganda.

Every non-violent demonstration is classed as a riot by the IDF, and lethal force is applied. Every. Single. One.

See, I can't take you seriously when you say stuff like that. You are either incredibly misinformed or you are intentionally lying. Either way, it's only disqualifying yourself.

It really is that one-sided in the West Bank. It really is unrelenting violence and killing.

It's just not. Not even the UN claims that: https://www.ochaopt.org/data/casualties Yes, there are many more casualties on the Palestinian side, but that's often what happens when you attack armed soldiers.

But even if it were true, wouldn't that be all the more reason to end the occupation with a peace deal? What are you even advocating for here?

yet Israelis and their supporters expect Palestinians to be violently attacked and never fight back. If they fight back then they don't want peace.

No, but we need a majority among Palestinians who want peace. You can never stop everyone, but there can be no peace if there is no political faction that wants peace. How would that ever work?

Even you, who wants peace, just proposes what has happened before that led to the horrendous situation we have now.

I'm saying Palestinians need to negotiate and give up their maximalist demands. They have never tried that. But knock yourself out and sanction them. Watch China step in, they'd love an ally in the middle east close to the Suez canal. And knowing China, I'm sure they won't tolerate any human rights abuses. This is a speedrun towards getting all Palestinians expelled and would be incredibly stupid.

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

cobcat:

No you didn't. You are spreading propaganda. Yes, there is a lot of unjustified violence in the West Bank. Nobody disputes that. Occupations are often awful for the occupied side. That's why the occupation should end with a peace deal.

And yet you defend the occupation and can’t stand it being criticised. And your idea of a peace deal is just more of the same, with no indication as to why Israeli violence would end or even be reduced.

Your claim that Israel is killing babies for fun is ridiculous propaganda.

Why do you lie? I said with impunity. And that is true. Everyone knows that there are no penalties for the IDF killing children. No member of the IDF has ever been convicted of murdering a child - not even Captain R. Heck, he wasn’t charged with murder and he wasn’t convicted of even a minor offence.

When the IDF kill children, bystanders, reporters etc with absolutely no repercussions what message does that send? It clearly says that Palestinians’ lives are worthless and Israelis can snuff those lives out at will. And they do.

And you object to that very obvious truth being stated.

See, I can't take you seriously when you say stuff like that. You are either incredibly misinformed or you are intentionally lying. Either way, it's only disqualifying yourself.

Have you ever seen or heard of a Palestinian protest in the West Bank not being classed as a riot? You know, just one, once, ever? No, you haven’t. Have you seen the footage of the march of return, where people holding signs 400 yards from the fence had their kneecaps shot off by the IDF? The IDF had turned maiming nonviolent protesters unto a contest. Unsurprisingly, the protests then got violent. Violence breeds violence. Only Israelis feel that Israel should have a monopoly on violence.

It's just not. Not even the UN claims that: https://www.ochaopt.org/data/casualties Yes, there are many more casualties on the Palestinian side, but that's often what happens when you attack armed soldiers.

Look at the stats. 20 times the fatalities and 25 times the injuries. You know what’s really interesting? The number of women and girls injured and killed. Even if you ignore the boys, assuming all Palestinians males from age 1 month and over are violent terrorist, what’s the excuse for all the girls and women killed and injured? Did all those women and girls attack the IDF?

But even if it were true, wouldn't that be all the more reason to end the occupation with a peace deal? What are you even advocating for here?

I am advocating for peace. As I’ve shown, you are advocating for the status quo. Your “Palestinians just stop violence” BS would have Israelis brutalise them forever under the guise of demanding total nonviolence from Palestinians for extended period of time - probably decades, while being absolutely fine with IDF and settler violence.

No, but we need a majority among Palestinians who want peace. You can never stop everyone, but there can be no peace if there is no political faction that wants peace. How would that ever work?

Why do you ignore the PA? They are meant to represent all Palestinians, they coordinate security with Israel, and Israel deliberately weakens them and starves them of funds.

It’s almost like Israel demands peace and then destroys all groups that work with Israel for peace. Let me guess - you will come up with some reason why they don’t count. And if they meet that you will find another reason and another reason and another reason, all the while demanding Palestinians accept “less than perfect” deals that solidify the occupation and push peace further away. Can Israel accept “less than perfect” partners? Apparently not.

I'm saying Palestinians need to negotiate and give up their maximalist demands.

What maximalist demands? A state on most of the West Bank with parts of East Jerusalem as the capital? A token right of return for 5,000 octogenarians? Compensation? Your “reasonable” compromise is permanent occupation called a Palestinian state. Israel will have complete control and impunity and Palestinians will be unable to do anything about it except report to violence, which will be brutally crushed and likely involve horrendous Palestinian casualties.

They have never tried that. But knock yourself out and sanction them. Watch China step in, they'd love an ally in the middle east close to the Suez canal. And knowing China, I'm sure they won't tolerate any human rights abuses. This is a speedrun towards getting all Palestinians expelled and would be incredibly stupid.

The US and Europe have been lavishly funding and supporting Israel, and the more they do the more Israel deepens the occupation and the more atrocities Israel commits with impunity. Proposing cutting off this lavish funding usually generates one of two responses:

The first is “but if you cut off the funding to Israel then they’ll be really nasty to the Palestinians!” What, the most moral people in the world would commit atrocities out of spite? I thought Israelis were just protecting themselves? And what exactly do you call the atrocities now?

The other is my favourite, “If you don’t give us $4 billion a year then we will go get $4 billion a year from China!” Why would China give Israel $4 billion a year plus other lavish funding? What would they get out of it? What happens to trade with Israel’s biggest trade partner, the EU? Is China really going to be stupid enough to swap to Israeli technology over its internal products?

No, every argument you have seems to be for Israel to have immunity and deepens the occupation, brutalise the Palestine’s, and blame them for it.

[-]

I already understood that you are simple-minded

[-]

alt-right-del@reddit

Really, +1000 deaths since 07th of October and that’s doing really good? The West Bank is on brink to be annexed and Palestinians to ethnic cleansed … that’s a far better option according you. The Zionist koolaid runs deep.

[-]

cobcat@reddit

I mean it's clearly better than Gaza, no?

[-]

alt-right-del@reddit

Spoken as a true Zionist

[-]

cobcat@reddit

Are you saying that violent resistance has worked out better for Palestinians? Large parts of Gaza are rubble and tens of thousands are dead. In the West Bank, you had 3700 deaths all the way since 1967. It should be obvious which path is better for Palestinians.

They will never defeat Israel with AK47s, homemade rockets or suicide bombers.

[-]

alt-right-del@reddit

True — Israel will be defeated in the public court of opinion just like South Africa was beaten to abolish apartheid — get used to the outlook of Israel being a pariah state for years to come

[-]

cobcat@reddit

True — Israel will be defeated in the public court of opinion just like South Africa was beaten to abolish apartheid

You... You think South Africa abolished Apartheid because of public opinion? It was a factor, sure, but Apartheid became unsustainable all on its own.

get used to the outlook of Israel being a pariah state for years to come

I'm saying that that's not a good idea. If Israel were to actually become a pariah state, what's stopping them from expelling the Palestinians for good? And how would they ever "un-pariah" themselves? They will just be more oppressive, a Palestinian state will become more unlikely, peaceful coexistence will become even more impossible. This would just make everything even worse and prolong the conflict. And ultimately, Palestinians still won't be free or have a state.

[-]

alt-right-del@reddit

They won’t be able to expel the Palestinians for good they have tried for years — Israel has no other option they won’t be able to sway other nations to take part in ethnic cleansing; to maintain relevance in the future they must be on good behaviour. With all the brute force shown the last two years it achieved nothing but global support for the Palestinians.

[-]

cobcat@reddit

They won’t be able to expel the Palestinians for good they have tried for years

They haven't tried at all.

With all the brute force shown the last two years it achieved nothing but global support for the Palestinians.

And what are the results? A peace deal that's a clear victory for Israel. What did Palestinians get?

[-]

DevA248@reddit

You are attributing Hamas' refusal to surrender arms based on the idea that they "cling to power at all costs."

But as I explained before, retaining the right to bear arms is something that Palestinian factions are largely agreed upon. Moreover you can't pretend that surrendering to Israel would lead to peace for the Palestinian people. You seem to be making a lot of assumptions that are unfounded in that regard -- at least back up your assumptions with reasoning.

The Jewish resistance did not surrender to the Nazis. Nor did the FLN surrender to the French despite repeat French massacres of Algerians. So no, your historical analogies are wrong. The cases you are talking about are when the genocidaires/oppressors are defeated, which would be Israel in this case. The social dynamics make a difference.

I don't know why you are bringing up "rich Arab states" or Western popular opinion because I didn't say anything about them. However if you would like to connect these factors to the topic, and explain how that means Palestinian factions should surrender their arms.

[-]

Maker_of_questions@reddit

So all militias in Gaza agreed with themselves they should keep their own weapons?…

[-]

It's not difficult. You talk of feeling safe. While Israel commits genocide. Do you see how that could be considered psychopathic, unhinged even.

The power dynamics are asymmetrical. Palestine cannot destroy Israel. Israel can and is right now destroying Palestine and committing genocide against it's people.

Palestinians are committing terrorism why? Because Israel occupies them.

When one side has all the power and the ability to take this conflict wherever they want it to go. The onus is on them.

Obviously Hamas and Palestinians play a part in this but it's the very fact they have no agency over any aspect of their life. No dignity and no self determination that we see ourselves in this situation.

The majority of the onus is on Israel. They hold all the cards. All of them. All of them.

[-]

Maker_of_questions@reddit

Uhmmm I’m pretty sure Hamas still has 48 Israeli hostages… and you can claim genocide as much as you want but even the UN doesn’t agree with you, they claim it might be defined as genocide if Israel performs actual genocidal actions

[-]

sivvon@reddit

This guy, arguing that 98% of the way to genocide is not genocide. That's your argument?

This is why it's so difficult to speak rationally about this topic. The mental gymnastics to justify Israel's actions knows no limits.

But lets unpack your falsehoods.

The UN independent international Commission of inquiry report released on the 16th October concluded that Israel has committed and continue to commit acts of genocide.

This is based on their actions and many instances were provided.

They also concluded that there is also genocidal intent based on statements by Israelis officials and their conduct.

Now, we also have the international association of genocide scholars who have also ruled this a genocide.

As for the hostages, yes there are believed to be 48 but only 20 of those remain alive. Thousands of Palestians languish in Israeli prison also with no charge.

They have agency in the aspect of: release all hostages, recognize the Israeli state and try a non-violent approach.

That's easy, the PA have already done that and it changed nothing. The more radical Hamas doing it would have the same effect.

The previous Intifada's forced both sides to recognise each other. This conflict has not happened in a bubble. We have been here before and Israel has a record that we cannot ignore.

[-]

Maker_of_questions@reddit

PLO hasn’t done any of those, the UN said if Israel continues this way then it might become genocide, and if something doesn’t adhere to all requirements then it is not defined as such. lol.

[-]

sivvon@reddit

You are referring to the ICJ ruling South Africa vs Israel in January 2024. It concluded Israel’s actions might amount to genocide or that there was a “plausible risk” of it.

It all but says Israel were committing genocide without saying it

“At least some of the acts alleged by South Africa to have been committed by Israel in Gaza appear to be capable of falling within the provisions of the Genocide Convention.”

UN special rapporteurs also said

“Grave violations committed by Israel against Palestinians in Gaza point to a risk of genocide.”

The interim report concluded with

.“The Commission notes patterns of conduct by Israeli forces that may constitute genocide, subject to further determination of genocidal intent.”

Now i would refer you to the most recent UN independent international Commission of inquiry that concluded in September 2025 that Israel is committing genocide.

“The Commission finds that Israel is responsible for the commission of genocide in Gaza … Explicit statements by Israeli civilian and military authorities and the pattern of conduct of the Israeli security forces indicate that the genocidal acts were committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, Palestinians in the Gaza Strip as a group.”

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you were not aware of the most recent ruling. Even though I explicitly told you which one I was referring to.

https://imeu.org/resources/resources/fact-sheet-israels-history-of-breaking-ceasefires/410

For another example, you can take Sabra and Shatila. Palestinian fighters agreed to give up their weapons / leave the camp, leaving behind civilians. Israeli-backed and -allied Lebanese fascist forces took the opportunity to kill 3,000 Palestinians and Lebanese, in a single day, in cold blood.

[-]

sivvon@reddit

This moral relativism is kind of obnoxious of you. I don't see how you could make the claim they don't care about their own people based on not surrendering and disarming.

The resistances aims have not been reached. Once that is reached then, and only then will they lay down their arms. This is pretty straightforward stuff.

The onus is on the oppressor, not the oppressed to stop the bloodshed. You really give Israel far too much leeway and put all the blame on Hamas. The power dynamics are so asymmetrical to the point of it being pure domination.

[-]

Moonlight_Brawl@reddit

Your geopolitical understanding is such a joke honestly.

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

Except Hamas stepping down would not have protected their people. The IDF was committing genocide with the full-throated support of most Israelis. Children and other civilians were being targeted along with doctors, aid workers, journalists. The IDF yelling “they were Hamas” only convinces the faithful, and even then there were multiple cases where the IDF lied, got caught out, lied again, got caught out again, and just happily continued committing genocide.

Hamas stepping down would not have materially impacted the slaughter.

[-]

Drake_the_troll@reddit

Also that israel are the ones who put them in power in the first place

[-]

Pizzaflyinggirl2@reddit

Hamas leaders and their families have been losing their lives before and after 7/10.

[-]

platp@reddit

Yahya Sinwar the leader of the troops in Gaza, died in battle in an operation he initiated against the terrorists invading his land and massacring his people. If he was a westerner, other westerners would undoubtedly see him as a hero who sacrificed himself for his people. But since he is not a westerner, he and his friends are "selfish" and are "evil" and are "clinging to power at any cost".

Recent-Response-2719@reddit

What power does Hamas have

They represent the "status quo" of the entire Gazan population.

The power dynamics are so asymmetrical between Palestine and Israel to the point it's total dominance.

Yeah you are correct and that is their trump card. It is easier to justify your actions by terrorizing people when you are facing the devil himself and the whole world's attention is shifted on him. Hamas knew they won't stand a chance against Israel since day 1 and they used it to their tactical advantage, successful at showing the true nature of zios while their crimes get sidelined by the ongoing genocide.

That's a genius move from their side if you think about it.

[-]

“It’s the Palestinians fault that Israelis mass murdered civilians and lied and said they were targeting Hamas!”

The only people responsible for the mass murder of Palestinians are the people who dropped the bomb in them. The only people responsible for the genocide are those who did the killing of the victims of the genocide. You don’t get to say “they made me mass murder children!” You decided to mass murder children all by yourself.

[-]

Recent-Response-2719@reddit

The only people responsible for the genocide are those who did the killing of the victims of the genocide. You don’t get to say “they made me mass murder children!” You decided to mass murder children all by yourself.

Supporting an organisation which is notorious for launching rockets from civilian areas is not even worth defending over lmao.

Even hamas killed hundreds of innocent civilians which is equivalent to the zio war crimes in gaza. The only difference is the death toll that's all. You are just delusional

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

This is just more of the “both sides” rhetoric that seeks to put the occupied and the occupier on the same moral foundation, and attempts to equate terrorist acts with genocide.

Palestinians are fighting for their basic rights. Israelis are fighting to deny the Palestinians everything.

Hamas committed war crimes and terrorism, killing over 1,500 Israelis on October 7 and after, about half of them civilians, and also kidnapped civilians. Israel is fighting to keep apartheid imposed and committed genocide, with over 70,000 dead minimum, and who knows where the death toll will end up.

It’s not even remotely a “both sides” kind of situation. Hamas at its worst can’t even dream of the depths of evil Israel descended to so effortlessly.

[-]

sivvon@reddit

He's cooked. There is no point continuing a conversation with people who refuse to engage with reality

[-]

sivvon@reddit

you give the game away with your full throated nonsense directed at Hamas but are quiet as a mouse on Israel.

Nice try trying to make Israel's genocide more palatable by equating both sides as equally barbaric. On ya bike mate.

[-]

sivvon@reddit

My guy says this without a hint of shame as the death toll rises slowly past 70 thousand people.

[-]

xray-pishi@reddit

Well said.

In the recent attack on Doha, Israel apparently missed the Hamas leaders, but killed a leader's son.

If I witnessed the illegal, extrajudicial killing of my own kid, all bets are absolutely off.

Israel knows what it is doing though. The idea is to provoke acts of violence z so it can crack down harder each time...

[-]

redridingoops@reddit

The idea is to provoke acts of violence z so it can crack down harder each time...

It's the same idea since 1948 though.

[-]

Oh no, its as if you hamas tried to kill everyone it saw and continues, and there's collateral damage in war. Enjoy the war continuing hahaha you asked for it

[-]

xray-pishi@reddit

I can't reply to your latest comments, they are prob getting deleted or sth. I could only see the first words of the latest one in my inbox, it started

"Sorry to busy"

You mean too busy haha. I can't see what u were "to busy" for though sorry, you prob got yourself some kind of ban.

Seriously, where are you from? You spell worse than a nine year old native speaker.

[-]

If I were a random citizen? I dunno, prob depends how connected I really felt to the land.

If I were a leader, and maybe helped get the peace agreement in place? I reckon then I could probably accept it, because I would have felt I got some kind of justice.

But my whole point there was, it is hard to know what you would feel/do about a country that unjustly killed your kid and didn't even apologize.

[-]

archontwo@reddit

This is something a lot of people miss I think (well, maybe not on this sub, but in general)

It is easy to brush off human instincts and reactions when you view an entire ethnic group as sub human.

[-]

Thevoidawaits_u@reddit

describing the Palestinian fighters who attacked Israel over the weekend as “human animals.”

why are you lying when your source perfectly contradicts you?

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

Gallant then said:

“We are imposing a complete siege on Gaza,” Gallant said. “There will be no electricity, no food, no water, no fuel. Everything will be closed.”

Murdering 300,000 people to get the hostages back after years of persecuting said people.

Germany and Japan seemed to do alright after ww2, they can decide for themselves and maybe even overthrow hamas!

Oh well, enjoy the idf shells!

[-]

SouthernChocolate635@reddit

October 7 was really suspect.

AFAIK “Israel” triggered the “Hannibal directive” and began to torch/shoot the “Israeli’s” that Hamas had captured.

They’ve given the hostages in Gaza the same treatment. There are multiple reports of this happening, and one day it’ll all come to light/mainstream conscious.

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-07-07/ty-article-magazine/.premium/idf-ordered-hannibal-directive-on-october-7-to-prevent-hamas-taking-soldiers-captive/00000190-89a2-d776-a3b1-fdbe45520000

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-07/israel-hannibal-directive-kidnap-hamas-gaza-hostages-idf/104224430

https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/defense-news/article-844008

https://jewishlouisville.org/the-idf-just-released-its-report-on-oct-7-here-are-some-takeaways/

Exactly. We're at "Pikachu face" level now.

It's been twenty years of siege on the Gaza Strip, punctuated by violent episodes where the IDF kills a bunch of people.

For most of the people who went from Gaza into Israel on October 7, it was literally the first time they had even been outside of the Strip, thanks to Israeli policy --- and even then, they needed explosives, paragliders and bulldozers to get out.

I'm not condoning what they did, but people have a sense of dignity. Of all unfree people, they were perhaps the most unfree, with a foreign country controlling their borders, their waters, their airspace z their population registry...

Given all the rhetoric in the USA about freedom from tyranny, it's crazy to me that so few yanks can understand the Gazan mentality.

Are you just supposed to go your whole life hoping things get better? I thought the whole idea was to throw the tea on the water and fight till you're free.

Or because it's Israel we're talking about, now all of a sudden the correct approach is non-violent diplomacy...coz obviously that'll work after a while.

xray-pishi@reddit

There is very little evidence for the rape thing. It is like two cases that are even plausible. Two years ago the claim was there were made gang rapes everywhere. that has been walked back.

Honestly, the more you look into it, the less convincing it becomes. The closest to an actual identified victim is "woman in black dress", and the witnesses have told contradictory stuff, and one also made up a bunch of other false claims about beheadings that never happened etc.

October 7 was burial and the music festival killings especially bad, but theres also been a ton of atrocity propaganda spread around, covering the same things it always does: dead babies and rape.

[-]

namikazeiyfe@reddit

There is very little evidence for the rape thing

There's evidence that it happened! The Human rights watch confirmed it, the UN confirmed it even the survivors narrated their ordeal.

[-]

xray-pishi@reddit

Nah, they didn't. Reports just said it was plausible.

One woman taken hostage kind of says she experienced some kind of sexual violence during captivity, but that's not October 7 and it doesn't sound like rape.

Just show the video or interview or wherever you're talking about.

Asni said, it seems like there are one or two potential cases, not proven but colorable. That's it.

[-]

namikazeiyfe@reddit

By cross-referencing testimonies given to police, published interviews with witnesses, and photo and video footage taken by survivors and first responders, the Guardian is aware of at least six sexual assaults for which multiple corroborating pieces of evidence exist. Two of those victims, who were murdered, were aged under 18.

At least seven women who were killed were also raped in the attack, according to Prof Ruth Halperin-Kaddari, a legal scholar and international women’s rights advocate, from her examination of evidence so far. The New York Times and NBC have both identified more than 30 killed women and girls whose bodies bear signs of abuse, such as bloodied genitals and missing clothes,

The most detailed witness account of rape is from a young woman who attended the Supernova music festival, where more than 350 young people were killed. The witness, who was shot in the back, said she was hiding in vegetation just off route 232 when a large group of Hamas gunmen arrived, who between them raped and killed at least five women. “They laid a woman down and I understood that he is raping her … They passed her on to another person,” she told police in a video reviewed by the Guardian. “And he cuts her breast, he throws it on the road and they are playing with it.” One raped woman was “shredded to pieces” and another “stabbed repeatedly in the back while she was being raped”, the same witness said in an interview with the New York Times https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/18/evidence-points-to-systematic-use-of-rape-by-hamas-in-7-october-attacks

Human Rights Watch also refers to the findings of the office of the UN Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Sexual Violence in Conflict and the UN Commission of Inquiry. The office of the UN Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Sexual Violence in Conflict, which interviewed people who reported witnessing rape and other sexual violence, concluded that there were “reasonable grounds to believe that conflict-related sexual violence occurred during the October 7 attacks in multiple locations across Gaza periphery, including rape and gang rape, in at least three locations.” https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/07/17/questions-and-answers-hamas-led-armed-groups-october-7-2023-assault-israel#_Toc171593941:~:text=Gender%2DBased%20Violence-,What%20were%20the%20main%20Human%20Rights%20Watch%20findings%20regarding%20sexual%20and%20gender%2Dbased%20violence%20on%20October%207%3F,-The%20extent%20to

Even Al Jazeera subtly acknowledge that it did happen but disagree with it being widespread and systematic

The I-Unit also examined claims that widespread sexual violence had occurred on October 7. It concluded that while isolated rapes may have taken place, there was insufficient evidence to support allegations that rape had been “widespread and systematic”.

“To show that it was widespread and systematic, we would need a lot more evidence than has come to light to date and a lot more corroborative evidence than is being put out there,” says Madeleine Rees, general secretary of the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/3/21/october-7-forensic-analysis-shows-hamas-abuses-many-false-israeli-claims

[-]

xray-pishi@reddit

Yeah, this is pretty much my point. The anonymous witness (often called S or Sapir) who gives this statement about terrorists throwing breasts around has given wildly inconsistent accounts, and at times flat out made stuff up. She was featured in "Screams without words". She is central in "the Dinah project" (authored by halperin-kadarri, who you cite) too, but since some of her lies had been exposes by then, that report doesn't claim the lies happened, it just uses the bits of her stories that haven't been proven to be lies (yet). Of course, the report doesn't ever mention these inconsistencies and lies, despite being aware of them.

You can get some info about some of "Sapir's" inconsistencies at:

"Screams Without Words - Wikipedia" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screams_Without_Words

The stuff about images of bloodied genitals was debunked as well. The ZAKA first responders have zero training in forensics; they went around and saw things like blood around genitals or dead women in bent over position and said it was evidence of sexual assault. Follow-up investigations showed many times they misunderstood evidence, the "bloody genitals" were actually caused by a bullet that grazed the woman.

And yeah, the UN report that says there are "reasonable grounds" to believe this stuff also notes over and over again how there is nothing conclusive, how witnesses kept changing and retracting their stories, and how the Israeli government refused to actually met them conduct a proper investigation.

Sorry bro. If it did happen, the Israelis probably shouldn't have gone around systematically removing all the evidence before even photographing the crime scenes. Given no proof, no identified victims, and only witnesses who also happened to make a bunch of stuff up, it looks like it's gonna remain completely inconclusive.

[-]

namikazeiyfe@reddit

Lol... I have provided sources from different independent outlets even Al Jazeera who are very anti Israel but all you did was to deny and deny. " Bullets grazed their private parts" 😂 yeah right, no credible sources have ever claimed that, not even Al Jazeera, but go ahead and deny evidences because it doesn't suit your narrative.

[-]

loggy_sci@reddit

Rape and war crimes denialism is disgusting.

[-]

You believe the Hamas leaders in Qatar are all fabulously wealthy, billionaires, like Israel claims, yes?

You also believe these people don't care about Gazans.

And as of a few months ago, Israel made it clear it is actively trying to kill these people. Very nearly succeeded, killed a leader's son.

So, if all that is the case, why don't these leaders just bail? Take their billions and head out to an island? They could likely call Israel and tell them about it if they wanted --- it would be a propaganda coup for Israel.

Seriously, if they don't actually care about the people they govern, why are they risking their lives to govern the people? Especially when they are secretly all billionaires, according to the Israeli government.

[-]

namikazeiyfe@reddit

Hamas' roots are as a charity organisation that fed kids and helped in community affairs. Their whole thing has been caring about their people

So when you pro Hamas shills say that Israel propped up Hamas to oppose the PLO, does that mean that Israel propped up a charity organization( Hamas) who cares very deeply about the Palestinians?
And when you pro palis say that Netanyahu funded Hamas, doesn't that mean that he was funding an organisation that loves the people of Palestine? WTH 😂😂.

And if they care so much about the people why have they not allowed them have an election for like 20 years now?

[-]

xray-pishi@reddit

Bro I'd be happy to discuss it, but not with someone who calls me a "shill" in their first sentence. Didn't read the rest. Can tell you all you wanna know, but I'm sure as hell not gonna bother with some guy throwing out insults before even making a point.

Rewrite wherever you're in about in a civil tone and I can address it.

[-]

namikazeiyfe@reddit

I can't even take anyone who says that Hamas cares deeply about the Palestinians very serious either 😂. You have to be a shill, naive or a hamas spokesman to even conceive such thoughts... Especially when Hamas themselves have come out to State categorically that the welfare of the Palestinians in Gaza is none of their business and have been documented murdering said Palestinians and are currently killing scores of them on the streets of Gaza as we speak.

Comments on this sub is amazing 😅. On Monday Hamas was created by Isreali as means to continue their genocide on Palestinians. On Tuesday Hamas are freedom fighters and then come Wednesday they're charity organisation that loves the people deeply. WTH 🤣🤣🤣

[-]

loggy_sci@reddit

Netanyahu supported Hamas, a charitable organization according to you. So you support Netanyahu’s action?

[-]

hummelm10@reddit

Hamas’ roots are as a charity organisation

HAMAS, an acronym for Harakat al-Muqāwama al-Islāmiyya, or the “Islamic Resistance Movement,” was founded in 1987 as an offshoot of the Palestinian Muslim Brotherhood. In 1988, the group published the HAMAS charter, defining itself as a chapter of the Muslim Brotherhood and stating its primary objective was to annihilate Israel and replace it with a Palestinian Islamic state.

Source

Odd charter for a charity organization.

[-]

xray-pishi@reddit

Should check out the IRA's original charter, it too says a bunch of ideological rubbish far removed from reality. Hell, the original charter of the NSDAP has a bunch of communist stuff in there lol

It's the exact same as saying "gotcha, America, you think black people are worth 3/5 of white people!"

These "charters" are published as publicity exercises when the group has a tiny number of members and long before it has actually coalesced.

It is crazy how there are thousands of organisations in the world with nutty/radical founding documents that they have long since revised, but there is this one organisation, Hamas, who apparently is forever bound to their original charter, even though its authors are all dead and it long ago disavowed and updated said charter.

Likud's current charter says there everything from the river to the sea is Israel --- that is its first sentence

Plus, Hamas', role as a community/charity organisation is well known, you can just ask any Gazan. It is how they became popular.

[-]

loggy_sci@reddit

This terrorist apologia is sickening. Hamas had openly and proudly contradicted this bullshit narrative that you’re trying to push that Hamas is some charitable organization that did a whoopsie on Oct. 7.

This sub is cooked.

[-]

Perfect_Cost_8847@reddit

Hamas’ roots are as a charity organisation that fed kids and helped in community affairs. Their whole thing has been caring about their people.

Except when they rape an murder thousands of innocents? This is the most bizarre propaganda I’ve seen on Reddit to date.

So, if all that is the case, why don’t these leaders just bail? Take their billions and head out to an island? They could likely call Israel and tell them about it if they wanted — it would be a propaganda coup for Israel.

Maker_of_questions@reddit

Well… The EU: “…widespread sexual and gender-based violence in the Oct. 7 attack on Israel”

UN: “There are reasonable grounds to believe that conflict-related sexual violence — including rape and gang-rape — occurred across multiple locations of Israel and the Gaza periphery during the attacks on 7 October 2023”, where in Gaza they explicitly mean that it was performed by Hamas against Israelis. And: “There can be no doubt about what happened on 7 October, said the representative of the United States, pointing to the report’s findings that several bodies, naked from the waist down, were recovered — mostly “women with hands tied and shot multiple times, often in the head”.”

Germany: “Hamas specifically targeted Israeli women and girls, using sexual violence as a weapon” France: “France reiterates its condemnation in the strongest terms of the rapes and other forms of sexual violence committed on October 7 against the hostages”

I personally know of a hostage who was raped in Gaza. I’ve (unfortunately) seen videos of mutilated boobs, vaginas, penises and decapitation.

[-]

MonitorPowerful5461@reddit

When did the above commenter say that Israel cares about Palestine?

[-]

xray-pishi@reddit

They didn't, it is just the age old narrative , like Netanyahu recording his ridiculous video about how proud he is of the Iranian football team, and how he loves the Iranian people so much. It is literally one of the all time propaganda classics.

[-]

TraditionalGap1@reddit

So why have they denied free and fair elections for 19 years?

Well...

A) Israel fomented a civil war in Palestine in the aftermath of the previous free and fair election; that's why we talk about Gaza and the West Bank as separate entities. There is some concern as to whether or not Israel is willing to allow another one across Palestine. And by concern I mean they are not.

b) Abbas is the one who pulled the plug on the legislative elections. Not Hamas. Abbas blames Israel for not allowing voting in Jerusalem.

Surely as an Irish person you can see the nuances of resistance groups committing terror attacks without falling purely in either category.

[-]

xray-pishi@reddit

If you were Irish you'd know english, and know that that's not what "literally" means

[-]

cmonnomorework@reddit

Damn, when did Hamas learn English, don't you have jews to brutalize? Oh wait, idf tanks and their shells are great at that

[-]

Firecracker048@reddit

No, they never said that. Their exact words were they would become a 'politcal party onle' only if their fighters are put in an army and their political become part of a new state. That's not disbanding, that's literally changing clothes. They've never said they would cease to exist, so please stop spreading misinformation.

[-]

cmonnomorework@reddit

Great, mass murdering rapists terrorist don't get to do anything except unconditionally surrender like japan or the nazis.

Enjoy the war continuing and kids getting killed, your tears will be glorious

[-]

Monterenbas@reddit

For any westerners reading, imagine how you'd feel if some foreigners literally decided how many calories you shall eat per day

Westerners don’t have to imagine anything, right when 750 000 Palestinians were expelled from their homes in 1948, 15 MILLIONS europeans were also brutally ethnicaly cleansed and kicked out of their countries, litteraly at the same time.

The difference is that they swalloded their pride and accepted their fates, as unfair as it was. They did not made delusional claim about « right of returns », 70 years later, or resorted to the mass murder of civilians. And today, they and their children are arguably much better for « capitulating ».

So no, westerners did not resist, when faced with similar if not harsher injustices, and this proved to be the right move in the long term.

[-]

cmonnomorework@reddit

Oh in 1948 when palestine and its 5 arab friends invaded israel to genocide them?

Hey keep invading and losing lands! Awesome the war is gonna continue until hamas is gone! Sucks for you guys haha

[-]

vvvvfl@reddit

ot made delusional claim about « right of returns », 70 years later, or resorted to the mass murder of civilians.

That is REALLY FUNNY considering that this sentence is literally zionism.

That being said, one could make the argument that yes, they'd suffer less if they capitulated and left. But go where? They're poor and don't have a state. Not even a passport.

[-]

In absolute terms you are correct that they did kill a lot of Hamas.

In relative terms they are correct that Israel touched civilians much more than they touched Hamas.

This kind of civilian casualty ratio is mind-boggling by war standards.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2025/aug/21/revealed-israeli-militarys-own-data-indicates-civilian-death-rate-of-83-in-gaza-war

[-]

StickyThickStick@reddit

The debate here wasn’t a comparison civilian deaths but the statement that Hamas has been untouched

[-]

haggerton@reddit

Here's the original quote you replied to:

Israel has destroyed much of thee Gaza Strip but apparently barely touched Hamas itself.

You chose to respond to one part of the sentence instead of the sentence as a whole. The sentence as a whole aimed at comparing civilian casualties vs Hamas casualties.

As to "what the debate is", this is an open forum. You can as easily point out an inexactitude in their comment as I can point out the lack of context in yours. If you want to accuse me of strawmaning from what you were talking about, I can accuse you right back of strawmaning from what the original commenter was talking about.

[-]

xray-pishi@reddit

No I mean you're right, they got much of the leadership in Gaza. But Hamas is cell-based for this very reason, makes it easier to regroup.

As we speak, Hamas is reasserting control over the parts of the Strip Israel is not allowed in per the ceasefire. It's been like a day and they are already executing the Shabab collaborators. Very much seems like they are still a thing, still well organised, etc.

It is a revolutionary movement, not about some particular leader.

[-]

StickyThickStick@reddit

Hamas replenished their fighters, their initial al quds brigades dont exist anymore as well as nearly their whole leadership and chain of command.

What you said with your comment is just wrong. You said they barley touched hamas. Which is as i said a complete lie.

"The military implications extend across multiple dimensions. Israel claims to have killed 17,000-23,000 Hamas militants, though Israeli intelligence’s own database as of May 2025 confirmed only 8,900 named Hamas and Islamic Jihad fighters killed. U.S. intelligence assessed that Hamas recruited approximately 15,000 new fighters during the war, suggesting the organization maintained recruitment despite losses"

source

[-]

xray-pishi@reddit

Bro you don't know what you are talking about, al-Quds are a part of PIJ and have nothing to do with Hamas. Besides, both al-Qassam and al-Quds, as well as about five other factions, were putting out videos of their recent ops as recently as a few days ago. Not sure how that is possible when they don't exist.

Yes, Israel hit the leadership, but Hamas is literally back in control over half of Gaza as we speak. They obviously were not destroyed. The whole structure of the org is designed so that it can go on after the leadership takes hits, because they know damn well it is basically inevitable, it has been for like 40 years now.

[-]

StickyThickStick@reddit

Sorry I confuse Al quds with Al quassam but that neither changes the reasoning nor the source I send you. I just confused the two words.

You still lied and evaded my point completely. Decimating both leadership and fighting force isn’t “barley touched them” like you said

[-]

Maker_of_questions@reddit

Yes but publishing 1 video every day of a squad consisting of 5 combatants in civilian clothes means they are 100% untouched

[-]

xray-pishi@reddit

Not 100%. The various militants groups have slowed down; what used to be 10 mortars is more likely now to be five, etc.

But some of these groups like NSB have like a hundred fighters or something, and even they were still active till the ceasefire.

You'd think if these groups were destroyed so bad, one of the eight or so would have stopped fighting, surrendered, etc. But all were still going as of ceasefire. So it def seems likely weren't crippled.

[-]

DragonBunny23@reddit

The whole world just voted for Hamas to be out of Palestine. It's not just Palestinians and Israelis saying Hamas out. It's everyone now.

When Israel wins the war Netanyahu will be awarded the novel peace prize and praised as one of many great leaders who stopped Jihad.

The Bible says Jews are the chosen people. The chosen warriors to blast apart the evil that is Jihad.

But of course they do not fight alone. Every time Jihad gets too wild the rest of the world reminds them to be silent.

Hamas has killed 45k palestinians. Hamas ensures women and children have no rights (they are slaves). Hamas forces all children to become jihadists. Their kindergarten graduation is a mock execution of Jews. Hamas is committing genocide.

Here are three videos explaining why Israel is correct. All speakers are Palestinians.

https://youtu.be/lNcT4Tpaoik?si=SL0Mv2gWaoTx0CXA

https://youtu.be/UPomqJz-qYc?si=eFKVzpHHtwDx6Ia_

https://youtu.be/QcATzU09Kiw?si=GtFKnUGNvHurRC-1

Palestinian: the people you pretend to care about 😘👁️🫦👁️

[-]

xray-pishi@reddit

The world *voted * for something? Netanyahu is a peacemaker? The bible discussed jihad? Man, you are living on your own plane of reality.

[-]

DragonBunny23@reddit

The Quran has a prophecy from Allah that promises to give Israel to the Jews. I didn't write the Quran - someone else did that for us.

[-]

xray-pishi@reddit

Bro take your meds

[-]

DragonBunny23@reddit

I love you 😘

https://youtu.be/ix9wpslKwBE?si=cv-lVkQSr8hbSriS

[-]

blindmodz@reddit

How much u get paid to comment this daily ?

[-]

We want ceasefire not a helping hand to Israel doing what they couldn't do with their coward terrorist army.

[-]

Wayoutofthewayof@reddit

I mean sure, but wasn't this explicitly a stipulation in the agreement?

[-]

flossdaily@reddit

Hamas has said from day one that they would happily disband under just terms. Such terms would be, in short, sovereignty for millions of stateless, choiceless, unfree people.

You're simply lying right now. You're making it sound like Hamas wants a two-state solution. They absolutely don't. They've made it 100% clear in words and deeds that they don't. Hamas will settle for nothing less than the destruction of Israel "from the river to the sea."

For any westerners reading, imagine how you'd feel if some foreigners literally decided how many calories you shall eat per day --- the minimum that won't starve you, of course. Don't suppose you'd resist?

You conveniently left out the part where these people have tried to destroy Israel over and over again for 70 years, and on a daily basis have been launching rockets at Israeli civilians.

And this is after Israel has offered them the most generous peace deal in human history. Arafat turned it down and started a wave of terrorism.

[-]

xray-pishi@reddit

No, I am not lying. It is clear from your comment you haven't actually listened to what Hamas itself puts out, and are just going off Israeli rhetoric and "omfg the heckin' charter!!", which has since been updated.

You, as American, also has zero idea what OBL wanted or what his motives were --- probably still don't. Just walked around saying "he hates muh freedom".

Regarding your talk about Arafat, you "conveniently left out" that there wasn't even an offer or statehood; Israel maintained the right to run roads N-S and E-W through the West Bank, which it could close at any time. It still exercised control over borders and air. As Rabin put it (before Israelis assassinated him for trying to make peace) Palestine would be an "entity, less than a state".

Sounds really fair bro, I'm sure Israel wouldn't have just ended up doing a defacto siege of the WB like it did with Gaza a decade later.

[-]

Stubbs94@reddit

Hamas have openly accepted a two state solution along the 1967 borders and a permanent cessation in violence while they talk to the occupation. Israel refused.

[-]

Don't suppose you'd resist?

Hah, tbqh, no, and I know I wouldn't, because I have gastroparesis from a (medical negligence) spinal injury, and our health service being in chaos and no treatment for years effectively has the same result. If you're actually getting such a minimum, day after day, you're not the ones with the energy to resist. Or to swiftly leave Gaza City when Israel demands it.

Can see why you end up with Hamas' military wing in a situation like this, be unsurprising if there were new recruits, but wouldn't be asking them what to do over ordinary Palestinian civilians.

[-]

moderngamer327@reddit

No Zionism was created decades prior.

[-]

CluelessExxpat@reddit

Lets put aside whether this is a good move or not.

Can someone explain how exactly Hamas can ben defeated by Israel?

They can literally just blend into civilians and then re-form when everything is done and dusted. And I can say with certainty that they probably have absolutely no issues in recruiting new members, especially after what Israel did to Gaza.

So, how?

[-]

montanunion@reddit

The same way it’s happening in Lebanon with Hezbollah right now and happened with other similar groups in the past. The realistic goal isn’t to have absolutely zero Hamas members anywhere in Gaza or to have no person ever hold any sympathies for Hamas whatsoever. The goal is to not have Hamas in structures in power, to have regional partners who are willing to fight Hamas too, to disarm Hamas enough on an institutional level that they can’t do significant harm and to give people an alternative to Hamas.

Will there be incidents where people do terror attacks in sympathy with Hamas? Almost certainly. But the point is to reduce in frequency and intensity. Instead of having the structures to send daily rockets into Israel, make it individual terror. Instead of individual terror with an AK 47, make it individual terror with a kitchen knife. Then catch as many of those before they can do harm and drive it home to them that they can either throw their life away for something completely pointless or do literally anything else.

And then everyone in Gaza individually has the choice: they can continue to support Hamas and die for it. Or they can support the peace process and live for it.

[-]

CluelessExxpat@reddit

But then what problem is that solving? You are basically saying that they will be powerless for a while, till they regain strenght. Then what, Israel flattens Gaza again?

I don't think people in Gaza believes in "choices" seeing what Israel has been doing in the West Bank for decades. They want to survive and options for that range from Hamas to nothing, unfortunately.

[-]

montanunion@reddit

You are basically saying that they will be powerless for a while, till they regain strenght.

That is absolutely not what I’m saying. Look at Germany after 1945, which is basically the most extreme example, because Nazism was very deeply embedded into the society, it committed the Holocaust and where a lot of people did genuinely believe in the Nazi ideology.

Was everything perfect on 9th May 1945 (after Germany officially surrendered)? No of course not. There were many people who still had Nazi sympathies. There was still antisemitism. And there were 4 years of very strict occupation (which included famine levels that are higher than what’s happening in Gaza right now - even in the comparatively rich American zone, German civilians only received around 1000 kcal a day). Life sucked. Censorship was strict to avoid Nazi propaganda.

But people were told, in very clear terms, that continuing to fight would make everything a whole lot worse. Of course it was not possible to make a new state completely without anyone who had formerly held Nazi views. But espousing them publicly in any way would cost you your livelihood.

I don't think people in Gaza believes in "choices" seeing what Israel has been doing in the West Bank for decades.

I do think that long term the occupation in the West Bank needs to end and there needs to be and will be an independent Palestinian state- but that state, like all states, will be deeply imperfect.

But right now, Gazan’s option isn’t “agree to this peace plan or continue fighting a bit more and get your perfect utopia.” It’s “agree to this imperfect, hard to implement peace plan which will hit snags in the road at some point and has opponents on both sides or continue the much worse conditions of a war you have no military capabilities to ever actually win until you have to surrender.”

I don’t think what’s happening in the West Bank is great. I think there needs to be international pressure to make the situation there better. But it is, by any conceivable metric, a million times better than Gaza.

Even if your choice was only to live in the West Bank or to live in Gaza in this point, only an absolute idiot would choose Gaza.

At the same time, the current plan does actually have the long term perspective to make things actually better. But they won’t get there if they’re not willing to even start.

They want to survive and options for that range from Hamas to nothing, unfortunately.

“Hamas or nothing” is basically the same thing. Hamas is exhausted militarily and has no allies. There is a different choice and that is this peace plan.

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

You know what didn’t happen in Germany? The allies didn’t set up settlements and move the allies population there to literally replace the German population. The allies didn’t set up apartheid. The German population wasn’t made stateless.

Quite a difference, wouldn’t you say?

[-]

Glif13@reddit

...

Yes, yes they did.

Even if ignore German removal from Sudetenland, Romania, Hungary and Poland as "not allies" — you have nothing to say for Konigsberig — today you won't find Germans there.

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

Palestinians have also been ethnically cleansed from most of their land. Are Germans today stateless and completely deprived of human rights?

[-]

Glif13@reddit

So you do recognize that your first statement was incorrect?

As for the rest — I do not recognize right for vengeance, I believe no one has it, so no matter how hard they suffered before that does not entitle them to increase suffering further.

I do recognize the right of self-defence (though October 7th were clearly not it) and fight for the human rights. But both would require to minimize violence to bare minimum that's needed to achieve the goal. And I fail to see how current actions of Hamas help to either protect them from further violence or secure human rights. They are therefore wrong.

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

To be honest, I took it at face value, not having time to dig into whether that is remotely true, even knowing that it was likely a lie by someone really on pushing pro-Israeli propaganda. I'll look into it later. In the meantime, sure, you were absolutely right. One atrocity does not excuse another. Even if one was against white people.

Very few are calling for vengeance. I'm not one of them. But there is a clear demand by Israel and it's allies to declare that Palestinians do not have human rights at all, including the right to defend themselves. All the pressure is on Palestinians to minimise the violence. There is no pressure at all on Israel to minimise the violence or respect international law. Why are you not demanding Israel stop murdering children? Instead you are saying that Palestinians have to simply be nicer to Israel...

[-]

Glif13@reddit

Look it's hard for me to say that no one wants vengeance, when people were tearing down posters with hostages across new york; raising placards with palestinian flag in the shape of mandate of palestine "from the river to the sea" written in blood-red colors or placing stickers with "October 7th do it again!" to the doors of jewish employees in the company where my sister works. I mean Hamas overtly believes "Protocols of Elders of Zion" to be true.

As for the my stance on Israel actions — it is the same os that of ICC.

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

Yes, Hamas are scum. Yes, there are antisemites. Yes ripping down posters of the hostages is bad regardless of the fact that it’s infuriating that violent thugs like Hamas taking 250 hostages generates worldwide sympathy but violent thugs like the IDF taking thousands doesn’t even generate a polite objection in public.

You know what’s really infuriating? Being told that “from the river to the sea” is a Palestinian call for genocide, but pointing out that a similar call is in the Likud charter and that quite a few Zionists believe in greater Israel means I’m an antisemite and bad faith, FFS.

[-]

redditing_away@reddit

No, but we also didn't support ongoing terror, vowed to attack again at the first opportunity and didn't back extremists whose entire purpose was to "get back what's ours no matter the cost" against a vastly superior counterpart.

We conceded we had lost and suffered the consequences, rightfully and justifiably so I might add. You have to make do with what you have, not what you want.

Perfect is the enemy of good and for the Palestinians the deal on the table is the best they can get. It's not perfect but it's a solid foundation to build upon for further improvements, figuratively and literally. Rejecting it won't net them a better offer but the resumption of Israel's policy of destruction.

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

redditing_away:

No, but we also didn't support ongoing terror, vowed to attack again at the first opportunity and didn't back extremists whose entire purpose was to "get back what's ours no matter the cost" against a vastly superior counterpart.

I can guarantee you that 40 years of being stateless after being ethnically cleansed and 20 years of living under apartheid, watching your occupier make more and more of you homeless and openly saying you will never have human rights and you will all eventually be turfed out and you would have.

We conceded we had lost and suffered the consequences, rightfully and justifiably so I might add. You have to make do with what you have, not what you want.

The Palestinians have done that and the response from you is “too bad. You will be stateless and have no human rights forever.”

Perfect is the enemy of good and for the Palestinians the deal on the table is the best they can get. It's not perfect but it's a solid foundation to build upon for further improvements, figuratively and literally. Rejecting it won't net them a better offer but the resumption of Israel's policy of destruction.

This is absurd. There is no deal in the table - none at all, just the status quo. Palestinians have asked for less than they are entitled to under human rights law and less than UNSC resolutions called for. Your and Israel’s response is essentially telling them that anything is too much, and they should literally settle for nothing and hope that the ethnic cleansing genocidal state of Israel one day decides to grant them something. The Palestinians didn’t commit genocide they were the victims of it. The Palestinians didn’t. Declare war they have been subjected to a decades long campaign of erasure and brutality. Yet you are arguing that they must forever have nothing.

[-]

Assassiiinuss@reddit

The allies didn’t set up settlements and move the allies population there to literally replace the German population.

About 12 million Germans were expulsed from eastern Europe, Pomerania and Silesia, which were integral parts of Germany, not conquered territory. Both of these regions were resettled by Poles.

The allies didn’t set up apartheid.

Germans were under occupation for years and had very restricted rights.

The German population wasn’t made stateless.

There was no German state whatsoever between 1945 and 1949, it was absolutely on the table to never re-establish one. Germany had limited sovereignity until 1955 and wasn't fully independent until 1990. I can guarantee you that, if Germans had continued to attack their neighbours, there would be no Germany today.

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

Palestinians were almost all ethnically cleansed in 1948. They have been living under a brutal apartheid regime since 1967, and people like you would rather they never get rights or a state.

Germany committed genocide and started a world war that resulted in up to 85 million deaths. Their occupation ended after four years.

Palestinians didn’t commit genocide or kill millions of people, but they have almost all been ethnically cleansed, they have been stateless since 1948 and occupied under a brutal apartheid regime for almost 6 decades. They were subjected to genocide and western states not only did not come to their aid, they actively armed and supported the country committing genocide.

So, is the blatant double standard racism or something else? Do you get an end to occupation after four years if you are white, but it has no end if you are brown? Would western states have opposed the genocide if Palestinians had lighter coloured skin?

Assassiiinuss@reddit

I'm not sure what comment you replied to, but it doesn't really seem like it was mine.

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

It was yours. You not understanding that is part of the problem.

[-]

namikazeiyfe@reddit

Emotional outbursts. That's all you lots have when you are countered with historical facts.

[-]

namikazeiyfe@reddit

Emotional outbursts. That's all you lots have when you are countered with historical facts.

[-]

montanunion@reddit

You know what didn’t happen in Germany? The allies didn’t set up settlements and move the allies population there to literally replace the German population

The Allies literally forcibly resettled 12 million Germans. Huge chunks of Germany were given over to Poland and Russia and resettled by Poles and Russians after being emptied of its former German population.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_and_expulsion_of_Germans_(1944%E2%80%931950)

[-]

You’re not actually proposing anything that will actually change the situation overall. “Things should be better in the West Bank” isn’t a Palestinian state, a political horizon, or even a promise that you would vote for a positive change for Palestinians.

I am not proposing anything. I’m a random person on the internet. There is an actual proposal to end the war in Gaza for good. Why can’t people on here agree that that is a good thing and a step forward. The war is horrific and it being over is a good thing.

We can’t give Palestinians human rights or a political horizon, they have to agree to being savagely brutalised and repressed forever and maybe something will change one day.

Again, this hyperbole is not true and it’s not helpful. Yes peace is a process. Nobody is expecting them to agree to be brutalized. This isn’t going to be the very last thing that ever happens in the Middle East.

But it is a step in the right direction, and a really tough to achieve one at that.

Perfect_Cost_8847@reddit

Yes to all of that. This is basic history. The Soviet Occupation Zone and later the German Democratic Republic wasn’t recognised by the Allies until the 70s. West Germany offered citizenship to SOZ/GDR asylum seekers who managed to escape. In all, 10 million Germans were killed - mostly civilians. 10.6% of the entire country. What came after the wars for the Soviet Occupied Germans was brutal Soviet rule. Gulags. Executions. Starvation. Torture. Concentration camps. Forced labour. Systematic and brutal rape. The period just after the wars, for example, was one of the most violent in the history of Europe. It combined widespread retribution and revenge, systematic dismantling of industry, and the imposition of total political control and ideological transformation. One particularly dark fact about this period is that the Soviets employed rape as punishment, and at least 1.4-2 million German women were raped. Many murdered. Roughly 30% of German industry was dismantled, economically crippling the nation for decades. Hundreds of thousands of Germans were placed into concentration camps. Tens of thousands at minimum are believed to have died in them from murder, executions, starvation, and disease. Millions of ethnic Germans fled west to escape Soviet advance; 12–14 million were eventually expelled from Eastern Europe. Between 1.5–2 million died from exposure, starvation, or violence during flight and expulsion. Many who remained faced reprisals or forced labor.

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

But that eventually ended. There is no hope of European countries supporting these abuses ending in Palestine. Palestinians aren’t white.

[-]

cyberadmin1@reddit

You might want to read what the Red Army did to German women and children bud…

“Historians estimate that hundreds of thousands to 2 million German women and girls were raped by Red Army soldiers between 1944 and 1945, with the highest concentration in Berlin during and immediately after its fall in May 1945.”

“Between 500,000 and 1 million Germans (mostly men of working age) were deported to the Soviet Union for forced labor in mines, railways, and reconstruction projects”

“In the Soviet occupation zone, the first postwar years were marked by food shortages, malnutrition, and high mortality.”

“The number of German civilians who died as a result of the Soviet occupation through killings, rape-related suicides, and deportations cannot be calculated precisely, but reasonable estimates reach into the hundreds of thousands.”

The Palestinians have it bad, but not THAT bad thankfully

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

Not for lack of Israel trying…

[-]

mmbon@reddit

Its a very big difference for sure, but there were millions of people driven from their home, almost none of which have returned to there former homes, most major cities were completly destroyed, there were serious food and energy shortages, large scale rapes especially in the east. To quote, I think Cicero: An unjust peace is better than a just war.

[-]

I think for me being disabled here (it's not as though we ever got past the British Empire yet either), it's that nothing feels hypothetical about the rise of the far right resulting in harm to us. That's just now.

[-]

BehemothDeTerre@reddit

Ok, but that's not really relevant to the fact that we're better off than in the early 40s, is it?

[-]

Amphy64@reddit

I definitely didn't say anything like that! Just that we've got an ongoing problem we haven't fixed.

[-]

BehemothDeTerre@reddit

Sure, but that's far removed from the discussion at hand.

[-]

Amphy64@reddit

Sorry to hear the 'not great bit, and sorry for picking on you guys as an example! It's not as though we got past the British Empire yet.

I think for me here, being disabled, it's that nothing feels hypothetical about the rise of the far right harming us. That's just now.

[-]

montanunion@reddit

You can't pretend this is a reasonable ordinary peace deal that's on the table, for both parties to agree, when there's darn all sign Israel intends to change.

It is the only peace deal at the table right now. It’s this or the war. Hamas does not exactly have tons of leverage here. You can nitpick the deal however you want and neither side is super happy with it, but it’s better than the war and it’s currently the only realistic alternative to the war. It has international backing.

How was Germany going with the NeoNazis, again, ATM?

Yes there are still Neonazis in Germany. They are nowhere near being in a position to commit another Holocaust.

But like no offense it blows my mind that this is how people actually discuss this. Do you think it would have been better if the Allies hadn’t accepted Germanys surrender in 1945 just because now 80 years later there are some people still holding right wing views (and for the record the number of people who actually hold Nazi views in Germany right now is very very low even among people who are politically right wing)? Do you think that would have led to less human suffering?

Again, Hamas is in no position to make Israel change much. There is international pressure on Israel to change certain things, but “not accepting Hamas in power in Gaza” is not one of them.

[-]

Amphy64@reddit

It's more of a surrender demand, although not for a war (Hamas got flattened according to the Israeli government, didn't they? Not much of a war).

Yes, of course it's the only thing being offered to go on the table, Israel, and importantly America, hold all the cards, that's the whole point. That Israel intends a land of milk and honey for Palestinians after bombing Gaza to rubble and continuing to settle the West Bank not only isn't convincing, it's not based in anything much the Israeli government seems to be saying or doing. Telling me it doesn't have to change, Hamas can't make it (obviously), is just reinforcing the point that it has no intention of doing so.

Do you think it would have been better if the Allies hadn’t accepted Germanys surrender in 1945

What I think is we did a crappy job of decolonisation, since that was never remotely the intention in the first place, and should have started at home first. Then we at least wouldn't have to be discussing all of this, like Tony Blair Viceroy of Gaza.

Haven't really had the impression leftist Germans feel they can afford to be that blase about the far right?

[-]

montanunion@reddit

That Israel intends a land of milk and honey for Palestinians

The whole point of the peace plan is that it’s not just up to Israeli intentions. No it won’t be a land of milk and honey. It will be rule by an apolitical Palestinian committee, overseen by an international board. That is significantly more than Israel was willing to give in the past and is mostly because Bibi so royally fucked up by bombing Qatar. It is also as fair as it’s likely going to be.

What I think is we did a crappy job of decolonisation, since that was never remotely the intention in the first place, and should have started at home first.

Because in 1945 nobody gave a shit about decolonization, they wanted to end World War II, the deadliest conflict in human history.

Then we at least wouldn't have to be discussing all of this, like Tony Blair Viceroy of Gaza.

We aren’t. He’s supposed to be part of the supervisory committee, not Viceroy.

Haven't really had the impression leftist Germans feel they can afford to be that blase about the far right?

Again, do you think there are any German leftists who think Germany in 1945 should not have surrendered? Because otherwise I really don’t see the point of the discussion. Yes post war Germany was and is not perfect. Post war Gaza will not be either. Post war Germany is clearly by miles better than war-Germany, for everyone involved. Hopefully post war Gaza will too

[-]

Amphy64@reddit

Thought they had a government before? This is less autonomy than that.

Israel wasn't going to give any more, right, as you say it's not just up to Israel. So it doesn't have any real intention of improving unless forced to by international pressure.

I'm not asking if post-War Gaza only has rubble left to throw at Israel, I'm asking why Hamas, or anyone, should expect Israel to have good intentions. Which it is not demonstrating in the West Bank.

Because in 1945 nobody gave a shit about decolonization, they wanted to end World War II, the deadliest conflict in human history.

Exactly, they didn't care. Pretty sure my grandad just wanted to get fed for the first time in his life. They didn't come out with a noble view of it, our government wasn't that fussed until it inconvenienced them and their ambitions sufficiently, we ditched Czechoslovakia, etc.

Again, do you think there are any German leftists who think Germany in 1945 should not have surrendered?

I expect they think the working class should've shot the officiers, like usual? Even I think that, and I'm supposed to be a pacifist.

[-]

montanunion@reddit

I'm asking why Hamas, or anyone, should expect Israel to have good intentions.

I don’t give a shit if they do.

I am asking why Hamas, or anyone in Gaza, should throw away the only realistic pathway to peace over speculations of Israel’s intentions.

They can continue to distrust Israel. Do you think Lebanon or Egypt trust us? No.

But it’s their choice whether to stop fighting or not.

I expect they think the working class should've shot the officiers, like usual? Even I think that, and I'm supposed to be a pacifist.

There was absolutely no widespread movement of that happening though. Like it’s ok if you think that would have been the ideal fantasy situation, but it wasn’t real. And while that was not happening, the fucking Holocaust continued. I for one am really grateful that the Allies found a way to remove the Nazis from power that did not rely on waiting until maybe some Germans would have decided by themselves to do a class war.

You cannot let perfect be the enemy of good in this situation.

The war needs to end

[-]

BehemothDeTerre@reddit

Thought they had a government before?

An autocratic government whose main policy was to try to kill as many jews as possible, alongside any Gazan who opposed it...

[-]

CluelessExxpat@reddit

Oof. I couldn't disagree more with basically everything written here. Comparing Nazis with Hamas? One was an invader and genocider, other is, no matter how bad their ideology is, in the reverse situation.

I don't even know how to respond to such comparison...

[-]

montanunion@reddit

Comparing Nazis with Hamas?

That’s not even what I’m doing. I’m comparing German civilians post 1945 with Gazan civilians now. They can choose to align themselves with a certain ideology or they can choose not to do that. There were instruments to persuade Germans to distance themselves from what was very shortly beforehand the leading ideology in their country and they worked reasonably well.

I’m not even going to go into the Nazis vs Zionists topic because it’s obvious rage bait

[-]

CluelessExxpat@reddit

Yeah but due to the difference I've mentioned, your comparison feels so bad. Its like apples vs. bridges.

For your comparison to work Israel needs to; give Palestinians sovreignty over time, a country, let international community provide as much aid as possible and increase their levels of prosperity significantly.

Its painfully obvious Israel is not going to do that (West Bank).

Nazi vs Zionism was not a rage bait. In terms of racial superiority, they share similar believes in its current form.

[-]

montanunion@reddit

For your comparison to work Israel needs to; give Palestinians sovreignty over time, a country, let international community provide as much aid as possible and increase their levels of prosperity significantly

Long term sovereignty and aid access are covered by the peace plan. How is prosperity Israel’s job and if you look at the Soviet administration of East Germany I don’t think that was a universal Allied point.

In terms of racial superiority, they share similar believes in its current form.

Zionism is not a racial thing. I’m a Zionist in favor of a two state solution and I believe ethnicity/race-based hierarchies between humans are complete bogus. It just means that there can be a Jewish state of Israel (with full minority rights) like there should be an Arab state of Palestine (with full minority rights). The same way there’s an Arab Republic of Egypt for example.

[-]

BehemothDeTerre@reddit

But then what problem is that solving? You are basically saying that they will be powerless for a while, till they regain strenght. Then what, Israel flattens Gaza again?

Then the non-Hamas government of Gaza polices them to avoid it?

You're acting like it's unreasonable to want the neighbouring state to not commit terrorist attacks on your soil, or sponsor/protect those who do.
If a terrorist org in Portugal was sending people to bomb buses in Madrid, the Portguese government would be expected to do their utmost to stop that organisation. Failing that, Spain would eventually take matters in their own hands.

[-]

Hamas isn’t just an organisation. It’s an ideology and a movement.

True, it's an ideology. It's not the one you pretend it is, though.

Hamas: "we want to slaughter all the infidels."
Pro-Hamas redditors: "uwu brave resistants!"

The ideology of Hamas isn't the ideology of the IRA, it's the ideology of Al Qaeda and Daesh. They don't even hide it, and you guys still pretend it's not.

[-]

I like how you ignored the other guy

[-]

Colodanman357@reddit

My mistake I thought you may be interested in an actual answer to your question with a source and not just wanting to argue. Sorry about that I won’t mistake you for someone that can engage in a reasonable discussion. Have a wonderful day.

[-]

MyCatIsLenin@reddit

That's not a source. Unless you're operating under Israeli logic of guilt until proven innocent.

I will have a wonderful day thanks!

[-]

BehemothDeTerre@reddit

Why doesnt Hamas operate outside of Palestine then?

They very much do, when they can. 2 years ago isn't that long, I thought you'd remember.
Now, they're no longer in a position to.

Hamas is no different than the IRA, ANC, or the FLN.

A fine example of the exact thing I was illustrating. "Hamas is no different from the NSDAP" would be a far more accurate statement.

[-]

MyCatIsLenin@reddit

WHERE'S THE EXAMPLES

[-]

Hamas is a broad-based coalition that welcomes members across the political and religious spectrum as long as they’re on board with resisting occupation. There are Christian Hamas members and communist Hamas members.

What nonsense, indeed.

They are religious supremacists hellbent on slaughtering the "infidels", among other groups. They literally tell us so (and show us so), yet their useful idiots on reddit pretend they're rosy resistance fighters.

[-]

Rafabas@reddit

They literally tell us, in no uncertain terms, that they are first and foremost an anti-imperalist movement.

Hamas affirms that its conflict is with the Zionist project not with the Jews because of their religion. Hamas does not wage a struggle against the Jews because they are Jewish but wages a struggle against the Zionists who occupy Palestine. Yet, it is the Zionists who constantly identify Judaism and the Jews with their own colonial project and illegal entity. Hamas rejects the persecution of any human being or the undermining of his or her rights on nationalist, religious or sectarian grounds.

This sounds a hell of a lot more like the IRA than ISIS to me.

[-]

vvvvfl@reddit

please man, stop with the religion thing. It's not religion.

[-]

BackseatCowwatcher@reddit

....but Hamas doesn't exist because of religion.

You sure about that?

The Islamic Resistance Movement, abbreviated Hamas is a Sunni Islamist nationalist[30] political organisation with a military wing

he Hamas movement was founded by Palestinian Islamic scholar Ahmed Yassin in 1987, after the outbreak of the First Intifada against the Israeli occupation. It emerged from his 1973 Mujama al-Islamiya Islamic charity affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood.

and the Muslim Brotherhood is...

Society of the Muslim Brothers, better known as the Muslim Brotherhood, is a transnational Sunni Islamist organization founded in Egypt by Islamic scholar, Imam and schoolteacher Hassan al-Banna in 1928.

Initially, as a Pan-Islamic, religious, and social movement, it preached Islam in Egypt, taught the illiterate, and set up hospitals and business enterprises. The movement's self-stated aim is the establishment of a state ruled by sharia law under a caliphate[34]–its most famous slogan is "Islam is the solution".

So yes, it exists because of religion.

[-]

vvvvfl@reddit

This is so stupid, why do I have to share a planet with people that argue in such bad faith?

right, brother in christ, do you understand that when I say "doesn't exist because of religion" I am talking about the reasons why Hamas exists in the first place. Right ? You understand that it is a nationalist movement due to their lack of a nation. It is islamic because GUESS WHAT, they's a muslim population.

Because if religion is the reason for Hamas to exist, where's Saudi Arabias version. Jordan, Egypt, Morocco, Indonesia, etc etc etc.

[-]

BackseatCowwatcher@reddit

I am talking about the reasons why Hamas exists in the first place.

You mean because the Palestinians repeatedly attacked Israel, (and the Jews prior to it's establishment) on the basis that the region was conquered and made Islamic land- which by the Quran means it's Haram for non-Muslims to ever control it?

Hamas is a terrorist group established on the basis of religion, continuing a cause inspired by religion, that is primarily justified by religion.

this isn't bad faith- this is reality.

if religion is the reason for Hamas to exist, where's where's Saudi Arabias version. Jordan, Egypt, Morocco, Indonesia, etc etc etc.

That's the Muslim Brotherhood, literally in every one of those states- it's the Muslim Brotherhood.

[-]

vvvvfl@reddit

sure, because I book says something surely everyone acts on it BECAUSE the books says so. Sure.

Hamas is an islamic nationalistic movement. They engage in terrorism and attacks against Israel. You get that and think for a second if any of these activities would happen if Israel wasn't there occupying land it wasn't theirs.

[-]

BehemothDeTerre@reddit

Hamas: "we are an islamic movement". Pro-Hamas redditors: "they're not!".

[-]

vvvvfl@reddit

Both what I said and what you said are true.

[-]

rollandownthestreet@reddit

What do you think Hamas stands for? Like literally. The name is an Arabic acronym.

[-]

dasunt@reddit

Pro-Hamas redditors are a minority.

Pro-Palestinian redditors are common, but obviously, an ethnicity is not a political party. Just like supporting Jewish civilians doesn't make you pro-Likud, defending Palestinian civilians doesn't make you pro-Hamas.

[-]

BehemothDeTerre@reddit

Pro-Hamas redditors are a minority.

Not on this sub, however.

Just like supporting Jewish civilians doesn't make you pro-Likud, defending Palestinian civilians doesn't make you pro-Hamas.

Agreed. Now read the comment I was replying to. It's not defending civilians, it's defending Hamas. Most of this thread is defending Hamas. Most of this sub is.

[-]

EternalAngst23@reddit

At no point in my reply did I defend Hamas. I merely sought to explain why they have re-established themselves so quickly following Israel’s withdrawal, and why they will be around for the foreseeable future.

Maybe you should stop twisting other people’s words.

[-]

dasunt@reddit

I reread the comment you were replying to and I don't see where it is defending Hamas.

Care to point out the exact part I missed?

[-]

BehemothDeTerre@reddit

The part where it's defending Hamas. It's the whole comment, how did you miss it?

Civilians, it doesn't mention. Just Hamas, which it paints as resistants.

Now, you guys aren't even going to only deny Hamas' words, but those of each other, even when they're just above? Come on, there have to be limits to how disingenuous you get!

[-]

dasunt@reddit

The comment explained why people may support terrorists, and why terrorist groups will form.

That's different from defending terrorist groups.

[-]

namikazeiyfe@reddit

They don't even hide it, and you guys still pretend it's not.

It's called willful ignorance

[-]

BehemothDeTerre@reddit

Yes, but it needs to be pointed out.

[-]

Totoques22@reddit

Nazism is an idiology and it got wiped off Germany

Hamas once again shows they don’t give a fuck a about Palestinians and put them in the worst spot possible

[-]

leto78@reddit

The difference with Germany and with Japan is that these were developed countries with robust institutions, well educated population, and they accepted unconditional surrender.

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

You think Nazi ideology was wiped out??Elon Musk was giving Nazi salutes in public on stage in front of thousands. The ADL defended him. The Nazis are trying to get back into power. The people you hate the most, the left, are trying to stop them. You are going to be in for a nasty surprise if you succeed in marking the right unassailable…

[-]

Perfect_Cost_8847@reddit

You think Nazi ideology was wiped out??

Yes. When people say “wiped out” they don’t mean everyone forgets about the ideology and we all experience shared amnesia. They mean the ideology no longer holds any power. There are no Nazi nations. Nazis haven’t invaded other nations since WW2. Ideologies can be defeated. They have been regularly defeated throughout history.

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

Then why was Elon Musk giving Nazi salutes on stage?

[-]

Perfect_Cost_8847@reddit

Which countries has Musk invaded?

[-]

Germany has an increasing problem with NeoNazis and the far right rebranded.

[-]

Ala117@reddit

Nazism is an idiology and it got wiped off Germany

israel once again shows they don’t give a fuck a about Palestinians and put them in the worst spot possible

ftfy

[-]

12bEngie@reddit

You can’t defeat the spirit of resistance. It’s a ridiculous thing to suggest. The nazis could never defeat jewish resistance.

If your goal is to defeat the human spirit, you’re inhuman and want genocide.

[-]

Israel has to kill every single Palestinian in the area and after that every Lebanese, every Syrian, every Jordanian, every Egyptian, and anyone else in the area who doesn't fit their supremacist ideals. It is the only way settlers colonies have managed to keep hold of the land. The indigenous people will always resist and they have the will to take much more damage than the settlers will take. It is an asymmetrical situation. The Palestinians win if they don't lose and the Israelis lose if they don't win. Thus there is an endless supply of people to fight Israel because they have nothing to lose and everything to gain while most Israelis have somewhere else to go and will flee if the going gets too tough.

[-]

Wayoutofthewayof@reddit

That's the point, if it is not possible, occupation is the other solution that Israel has.

[-]

BehemothDeTerre@reddit

Only when religion no longer dominates the region, I fear.

[-]

Misztral@reddit

What makes you think they want to defeat Hamas

[-]

[-]

DevA248@reddit

There is no bar, no standard, nothing.

You keep pretending that semantics are based in objective material reality, and that it is not heavily influenced by power.

[-]

Effective_Arm_5832@reddit

Targetting civilians for to further political ams. It's pretty simple: Hamas is without a single shred of a doubt a terrorist organization.

(The IDF on the other hand targets combatants and civilians are collateral, which doesn't make them a terrorist organization.)

[-]

DevA248@reddit

Hamas is not a "terrorist organization" at all.

The IDF, on the other hand, is without a single shred of doubt a bloodthirsty and genocidal organization that intentionally massacres tens thousands of people and snipes children in the head.

[-]

Ala117@reddit

ask the west bank's "Moderate government".

[-]

fcukou@reddit

As long as Israel exists they won't be a functioning Palestine. FTFY.

[-]

NARVALhacker69@reddit

Mandela was offered early release from prison if he renounced to armed struggle, he responded that as long as apartheid existed he and the ANC wouldn't give up their arms

[-]

Ax_deimos@reddit

Yeah, that was Apartheid policies Mandela was against, not the existance of white people. Hamas is a death cult interested in killing Jews and happy to use Gazans as ablative armour.

But it doesn't matter, Israel won the war and they'll get their way sooner or later. Everybody knows this, which is why the world is already planning what a post Hamas Gaza should look like. It's why so many Arab countries endorsed Trump's plan to transfer Gaza to the PLO and have security be handled by an Arab coalition force.

Hamas has no allies and no future. They're trying to cling on to power to the last Gazan. But they'll be removed eventually, and history will remember them as the terrorist group that betrayed its own people by intentionally throwing them to the wolves to keep themselves in power for a few moments longer.

[-]

jjonj@reddit

they don't want arms to use against Israel but rather to use against Palestinians

[-]

AVeryBadMon@reddit

This is increasingly looking to be the case day by day.

[-]

platp@reddit

Completely delusional. With all the tanks, drones, intelligence, planes, bombs, Israeli coward terrorists failed to defeat the ressitance. And the resistance has one big thing on their side, they are right to resist the terror colony. I know being right has no meaning to you but it has for the rest of us.

[-]

AVeryBadMon@reddit

No, delusion is thinking that Hamas is some sort of "resistance". They haven't resisted shit, they're incapable of doing any resisting. If they were able to, then where is it? It's like I said, they've only ever been capable of a few surprise terrorist attacks on civilians in the 20 years they've been in power.

Israel is so much more powerful that it's overwhelming to a comical degree, Israel right now de facto controls all of Gaza, and they're doing whatever they want with absolutely zero push back or "resistance".

I'm sure the hundreds of thousands of Gaza with no homes, food, or clean drinking water are very concerned about self righteous while bombs and bullets are literally flying over their heads... Get real.

[-]

meister2983@reddit

Israeli coward terrorists failed to defeat the ressitance.

Yeah because Israel is constrained to some degree by humanitarian law (to some degree even though it breaks it all the time).

Obviously given a free hand Israel could defeat Hamas though it might take a quarter of the population down with them

[-]

Elim-the-tailor@reddit

I can't see how a long-term peace deal can be reached without Hamas being removed. There has been some western pressure on Israel to stop throttling aid, but everyone has been clear that Hamas can no longer play a role (e.g. read through the conditions for recognition of Palestine from the UK/Canada/France/Aus -- would imagine this is a red line for the US as well).

[-]

GothicGolem29@reddit

This sounds like the ceasefire could collapse eventually. The deal explicitly says Hamas will disarm if Hamas refuses I don't know how he ceasefire will hold

[-]

sar662@reddit

Are we shocked? At all? Anyone?

Israel doesn’t want peace

I disagree. I think many of israelis have dispaired of peace but public polling pretty consistently still shows a desire for it and even a willingness to pay a real cost.

Watching you panic at the thought of sanctions is amusing

Not sure I'm panicking. Israel would be hurting but it's also a pretty self sufficient economy - it was built that way deliberately because of the boycotts that have been part of its reality since the beginning.

Unfortunately it’s 30 years too late for a 2SS.

I don't know what to do with this since I can't see any other workable solution.

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

What “real” price are Israelis willing to pay for peace? The best anyone seems willing to do is say Palestinians should be forced to accept limited self rule in part of the West Bank except one woman who is for a fulll Palestinian state “eventually,” which in the peace talks industry in Israel is code for never.

I’m proposing Israel take over all that previous land in the West Bank and make Palestinians full citizens.

[-]

Awww planning your next 10/7 like hamas leaders say they will? Enjoy continuing the war then and getting gazans killed! Your tears will be so fun to read here hahaha

[-]

Glif13@reddit

Does deal says palestinians? I believe it only says Hamas.

[-]

Adjective_Noun1312@reddit

I dunno if you've had your head in the sand for three past couple years, but Israel has been labeling pretty much all of their victims "Hamas" the whole time. Hospital? Hamas base. Daycare? Hamas babies. Aid convoys? Hamas meals. Journalists? Hamas agents.

The irony is that their lies have probably become more unintentionally honest as their genocide went on because, big shocker, murdering people tends to radicalise their surviving friends and family members...

[-]

Did Israel attack first?

[-]

kjchowdhry@reddit

Yes. The Palestinians actually welcomed Europeans fleeing the holocaust when those same Europeans turned around and murdered them en masse via the leahy, haganah, and irgun terrorost groups. This all started with terrorism from what is now the israeli “defense” forces

[-]

What you are saying is actually objectively wrong.

The conflict progressed at every stage when Zionists kept aggressing and expelling people from their land, which happened at a different pace depending on the region. However and despite that, there were Palestinians and even Zionist settlements who were on friendly relations up to 1947, and the Palestinians were surprised when their Zionist neighbors attacked them. Avi Schlaim notes this.

Yes, what you are posting is hasbara, and it is contrary to serious historical analysis.

[-]

HealthPacc@reddit

Again, it’s so well known it has a wiki page, but as usual objective historical fact is “hasbara” that must be denied to maintain the narrative with no sources to back it up. At best you can shift goalposts to saying “well, some Jews and Arabs got along, therefore everything is the Jews fault.”

“Civil war in the Levant? Arab and Zionist groups fighting each other and the British? Massacres of Jewish communities? None of this happened, fact is Hasbara. The only truth is that Zionists just started shooting arabs for fun and there was no fighting at all until 1947, and even then the Arabs did absolutely nothing bad ever, and never had any hostilities until the insidious Jews started it all.”

[-]

Ax_deimos@reddit

No... by 1918 there were terror attacks happening on Jews and Jewish businesses in Palestine. Violent riots too.

The Mufti of Jerusalem at that time of the Holocaust ( 1938-1945) was travelling to meet Hitler in Germany.

British policies tried restricting Jewish immigration to something like 14000 per year.

No. Jews were NOT helped by Palestinians to bring in Jewish refugees during WW2 or after it.

[-]

HourEast5496@reddit

by 1918 there were terror attacks happening on Jews and Jewish businesses in Palestine. Violent riots too.

In retaliation to the Zionists terrorist organization made of violent european, which your lot very proudly integrated in your country.

The Mufti of Jerusalem at that time of the Holocaust ( 1938-1945) was travelling to meet Hitler in Germany.

Mufti was a British employee hired by a British Jewish, worked for and reported to that man, and met with many leaders at the instructions of his British employers.

British policies tried restricting Jewish immigration to something like 14000 per year.

Gee! I wonder why was that when these people were forming terrorist organizations, stealing from locals, killing anyone who resisted them, including arab jews living there long before zios showed up. They used schools, synagogues, and clinics/hospitals to hide weapons, bombs and would conduct meeting there as well. Which make sense why zios project on Palestinians.

[-]

flossdaily@reddit

The Arabs were in talk with the Nazis about building a concentration camp to kill the Jews in the Middle East.

The Arab Nations have ethnically cleansed their entire Jewish population.

Now you're going to pretend that they welcome Jews with open arms? Do you think anyone's going to believe that?

[-]

HourEast5496@reddit

The Arabs were in talk with the Nazis about building a concentration camp to kill the Jews in the Middle East.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Man!! You hasbarists think everyone is a retard like you and would believe anything and everything you say. This is the era of fast information where your lies are exposed with in minutes.

You would want us to believe that zios flocked to a land that was preparing for holocaust and then fought everyone to settle down in mortal danger and they couldn't do that while living in Europe, their homeland ????

I wonder how you live your daily life with such low I.Q?

The Arab Nations have ethnically cleansed their entire Jewish population.

Thanks to the exposes during this whole holocaust of Palestinians, we now know that Israel ran terroristic plans throughout the ME to drive out arab jews so they could live in "israel" as human shields otherwise Zios of Europe had no interest in arab jews. They just wanted land for white, educated, and wealthy jews only.

If you want me to quote 1st president of "israel" I will gladly do that for your benefit.

Now you're going to pretend that they welcome Jews with open arms?

Poor Palestinians did welcome those avoiding being gassed and burned to death. History tells us that much, and your lies won't work here, zio.

[-]

BackseatCowwatcher@reddit

Ironically people do believe that, people who would rather ignore real history that’s inconveniently incompatible with the narrative that the Palestinians were only ever victims and never did anything wrong.

[-]

WannaAskQuestions@reddit

I commend someone from the US to remember and cite historical facts. Thank you, brother!

[-]

kjchowdhry@reddit

Appreciate the kudos. We’re not all the same over here, though. Many in my country are opposed to zionism. Especially the younger generation. Some Jewish members in my local community are especially vocal about it, dawning keffiyehs to show their support and distance themselves from zionism

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

That is great to see and hear about. I hope enough pressure can be brought to bear so that this is finally resolved nonviolently.

[-]

BackseatCowwatcher@reddit

I commend someone from the US to remember and cite historical facts.

The thing is, he isn’t “citing historical facts” he’s quoting lies with no basis in reality.

The Palestinians started massacring the Jews in the 1920s, and pressured the British to totally prevent Jewish immigration- by 1921 to the point where they deported Jews fleeing the Holocaust back to Nazi Germany prior to ww2, they would later go on to seek aid in committing a Holocaust in Palestine from both Italy and the Nazis.

[-]

SpontaneousFlame@reddit

Killing people is wrong, I won’t defend that, but it didn’t come out of nowhere. Zionist colonialists were colluding with the British occupiers to disenfranchise and expel Palestinians from homes and lands that they had lived in and worked on for generations. Buying land and expelling the population, refusing work for non-Jews and impoverishing the Palestinians were key strategies that the Zionist colonisers had agreed upon and written about extensively.

[-]

moderngamer327@reddit

The local population was not displaced by people immigrating. People were only displaced after the Nakba.

What rights do they not have?

[-]

teo_vas@reddit

for Israel, Hamas is a nuisance. for Hamas, radical Zionists are existential threat. since Hamas has no other support, all that is doing by keeping "resistance", is to put under more pressure the Palestinians in the area. Hamas is an ideology but as long as there is no outside support, for Hamas and similar groups, this is a lost cause and all that can bring their "resistance" is more death.

[-]

AutoModerator@reddit

The link you have provided contains keywords for topics associated with an active conflict, and has automatically been flaired accordingly. If the flair was not updated, the link submitter MUST do so. Due to submissions regarding active conflicts generating more contrasting discussion, comments will only be available to users who have set a subreddit user flair, and must strictly comply with subreddit rules. Posters who change the assigned post flair without permission will be temporarily banned. Commenters who violate Reddiquette and civility rules will be summarily banned.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.