Gaza War, Part 3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the main worries with Israel is if things go bad they will start using nuclear weapons. If you are willing and proudly justifying a genocide why would you not use nuclear weapons?

Netanyahu would use his nukes only if this Democrat WH is at his side, at least unofficially.

What makes the last few months and whatever happens in Gaza such a disaster for Americans: the genocidal and warmongering crap the Israelis have done and will do implicates us. It has already done us serious damage and can only get worse, barring a major change in direction.

Yes, let’s worry about the “genocidal and warmongering crap” and not focus on the terrorist organizations we’re aligning ourselves with. Let’s pretend that the Gazans are all complete innocents and not controlled by a terrorist regime that wants to kill all Israelis, and let’s just say that Muslim extremism is not a threat to the US or Europe or the world. Let’s just allow Iran and Russia and China control our social media, our elections. Let’s just give the terrorists the keys to the car and watch them and the Israelis kill each other and cross our fingers and hope it will all work out in the end.

Do you really think the PP was suggesting that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the main worries with Israel is if things go bad they will start using nuclear weapons. If you are willing and proudly justifying a genocide why would you not use nuclear weapons?

How to say "I know nothing about IR" without saying "I know nothing about IR".

I’d also worry about the judgment of anyone who non-ironically uses ‘IR’. Alphabet soup is a tell, especially when it is used to denigrate serious concerns.

You worry too much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And if you're really all about ancestral lands, then guess what, Armenians lived in Artsakh for centuries, but that didn't keep Israel from supplying Azeris with top notch weapons to help them expel the natives.

DP.

I agree that claims to ancestral lands are unworkable.

Which is why Palestinians have no claim to Israel, since they last inhabited it > 80 years ago.

Actually, under UN Resolution 194, they do. They can either return to their homes or receive compensation. And in the case of Palestinians, we're not talking only about "ancestral lands," as in the lands of their ancestors. We're talking about their OWN lands, where they lived as young children and from which their parents and grandparents were evicted (or murdered) by Zionist terrorists (like the Irgun and Alexandroni Brigade) and the IDF. Also, it's under 80 years for many of those evicted during the Nakba. 80 years is very different from 2,000 years.

Excellent.

So Pakistanis also have the right to reclaim their family lands in India.

And we'll unwind the map of Africa to reapportion land ownership to reflect the end of the colonial period?

Splendid idea.

Anybody violently evicted from their homes and forced out of their homelands in the recent past should absolutely have the same options offered by UN Resolution 194. That is, they should either have the right of return or receive compensation. In my opinion, Native Americans should receive far more reparations than the occasional scant handouts they've been granted so far. If you want to talk about justice since the end of the colonial period, we agree.

Things get absurd when you try to go back 2,000 years to reclaim the land where a percentage of your ancestors may have once lived, and they really get ugly when you feel entitled to evict or butcher the people you used to share the land with, but who remained there from that time onward. It's worth considering where all of our ancestors lived 2,000 years ago. If you assume 25 years per generation, that's 80 generations and means we all have a LOT of ancestors who lived back then. The world population was much smaller at that time (perhaps 150 to 300 million). It's easy to see how closely related people living in what is now Israel must have been. My own ancestors probably lived in the Middle East and Europe, and I have distant cousins today who are Jewish, Muslim, Christian, a few other religions, and (mostly) secular. Trying to establish land ownership after 80 generations is virtually impossible. However, there are people alive today who were violently forced out of Palestine by the IDF and had all but the clothes on their backs stolen from them, and they cannot even visit the homes where they used to live. That is clearly an injustice that needs to be addressed.

So you favor a policy that would lead to civil wars across Africa, the ME, parts of Europe, and much of Asia?

Doesn't seem like the most humane approach to me.

Your idealism is...painful.

Land-grabbing by ethnosupremacist colonialists, often accompanied by the exploitation, eviction, and/or extermination of the indigenous population, hasn't exactly been a path to peace over human history. In fact, this process has led to horrific violence, as we see in Palestine/Israel.

Totally inapposite.

Umm (rolls eyes) ... yeah. Brilliant refutation. LOL

Refutation?

No interest in refuting—you’re quite correct.

Problem is that your argument is at best tangentially related to the prior discussion.

Am I to conclude that you’ve abandoned the argument that we should redraw borders across the globe to right the wrongs of the colonial era?

How is pointing out that "exploitation, eviction, and/or extermination of the indigenous population hasn't exactly been a path to peace over human history" not directly related to this discussion? The eviction and extermination parts (ongoing since the Nakba) are what have led to the current untenable and unstable situation in Palestine/Israel. It is a straw man to claim I've argued we should "redraw borders." I've argued instead for the right of return or compensation. As an example, I think Native American nations should receive reparations in instances where the U.S. government has violated land treaties, which seems more practical than, for example, carving out an independent Arapahoe/Cheyenne state 173 years after a treaty effectively granting them a specific area of land was signed. Of course, the Native Americans can live freely on that land today. There are also cases where redrawing borders has, in fact, been the just solution. For example, the borders of what were Bantustans in apartheid South Africa were dissolved, and now people who needed special passes to leave those areas can move freely about the country.

It has to be a mixture of both- the back hills and other national parks that were were strongly tricked or pressured away from them should be returned to Native American control and the indigenous people of Mexico, Canada and the US should be encouraged to work in concert in a G7 type body and all monetary reparations should be made and tribes that were purged from the rolls after WW2 should be reinstated and their desendants are owed compensation. It is also of note though that Cherokee and other tribes who were herded into Oklahoma are free if they have teh money to purchases land in Georgia, Tennessee etc. They also can marry Americans, they have full citizenship and can marry a person from overseas and bring them here. Arabs in Israel can do none of these things, reparations and a right to return are not on the radar, Israel is as apartheid state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And if you're really all about ancestral lands, then guess what, Armenians lived in Artsakh for centuries, but that didn't keep Israel from supplying Azeris with top notch weapons to help them expel the natives.

DP.

I agree that claims to ancestral lands are unworkable.

Which is why Palestinians have no claim to Israel, since they last inhabited it > 80 years ago.

Actually, under UN Resolution 194, they do. They can either return to their homes or receive compensation. And in the case of Palestinians, we're not talking only about "ancestral lands," as in the lands of their ancestors. We're talking about their OWN lands, where they lived as young children and from which their parents and grandparents were evicted (or murdered) by Zionist terrorists (like the Irgun and Alexandroni Brigade) and the IDF. Also, it's under 80 years for many of those evicted during the Nakba. 80 years is very different from 2,000 years.

Excellent.

So Pakistanis also have the right to reclaim their family lands in India.

And we'll unwind the map of Africa to reapportion land ownership to reflect the end of the colonial period?

Splendid idea.

Anybody violently evicted from their homes and forced out of their homelands in the recent past should absolutely have the same options offered by UN Resolution 194. That is, they should either have the right of return or receive compensation. In my opinion, Native Americans should receive far more reparations than the occasional scant handouts they've been granted so far. If you want to talk about justice since the end of the colonial period, we agree.

Things get absurd when you try to go back 2,000 years to reclaim the land where a percentage of your ancestors may have once lived, and they really get ugly when you feel entitled to evict or butcher the people you used to share the land with, but who remained there from that time onward. It's worth considering where all of our ancestors lived 2,000 years ago. If you assume 25 years per generation, that's 80 generations and means we all have a LOT of ancestors who lived back then. The world population was much smaller at that time (perhaps 150 to 300 million). It's easy to see how closely related people living in what is now Israel must have been. My own ancestors probably lived in the Middle East and Europe, and I have distant cousins today who are Jewish, Muslim, Christian, a few other religions, and (mostly) secular. Trying to establish land ownership after 80 generations is virtually impossible. However, there are people alive today who were violently forced out of Palestine by the IDF and had all but the clothes on their backs stolen from them, and they cannot even visit the homes where they used to live. That is clearly an injustice that needs to be addressed.

So you favor a policy that would lead to civil wars across Africa, the ME, parts of Europe, and much of Asia?

Doesn't seem like the most humane approach to me.

Your idealism is...painful.

Land-grabbing by ethnosupremacist colonialists, often accompanied by the exploitation, eviction, and/or extermination of the indigenous population, hasn't exactly been a path to peace over human history. In fact, this process has led to horrific violence, as we see in Palestine/Israel.

Totally inapposite.

Umm (rolls eyes) ... yeah. Brilliant refutation. LOL

Refutation?

No interest in refuting—you’re quite correct.

Problem is that your argument is at best tangentially related to the prior discussion.

Am I to conclude that you’ve abandoned the argument that we should redraw borders across the globe to right the wrongs of the colonial era?

How is pointing out that "exploitation, eviction, and/or extermination of the indigenous population hasn't exactly been a path to peace over human history" not directly related to this discussion? The eviction and extermination parts (ongoing since the Nakba) are what have led to the current untenable and unstable situation in Palestine/Israel. It is a straw man to claim I've argued we should "redraw borders." I've argued instead for the right of return or compensation. As an example, I think Native American nations should receive reparations in instances where the U.S. government has violated land treaties, which seems more practical than, for example, carving out an independent Arapahoe/Cheyenne state 173 years after a treaty effectively granting them a specific area of land was signed. Of course, the Native Americans can live freely on that land today. There are also cases where redrawing borders has, in fact, been the just solution. For example, the borders of what were Bantustans in apartheid South Africa were dissolved, and now people who needed special passes to leave those areas can move freely about the country.

It has to be a mixture of both- the back hills and other national parks that were were strongly tricked or pressured away from them should be returned to Native American control and the indigenous people of Mexico, Canada and the US should be encouraged to work in concert in a G7 type body and all monetary reparations should be made and tribes that were purged from the rolls after WW2 should be reinstated and their desendants are owed compensation. It is also of note though that Cherokee and other tribes who were herded into Oklahoma are free if they have teh money to purchases land in Georgia, Tennessee etc. They also can marry Americans, they have full citizenship and can marry a person from overseas and bring them here. Arabs in Israel can do none of these things, reparations and a right to return are not on the radar, Israel is as apartheid state.

What are you talking about? The 2m Israeli Arabs have full rights. Are you seriously unaware of that? You’ve clearly never been to Israel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the main worries with Israel is if things go bad they will start using nuclear weapons. If you are willing and proudly justifying a genocide why would you not use nuclear weapons?

Netanyahu would use his nukes only if this Democrat WH is at his side, at least unofficially.

What makes the last few months and whatever happens in Gaza such a disaster for Americans: the genocidal and warmongering crap the Israelis have done and will do implicates us. It has already done us serious damage and can only get worse, barring a major change in direction.

Yes, let’s worry about the “genocidal and warmongering crap” and not focus on the terrorist organizations we’re aligning ourselves with. Let’s pretend that the Gazans are all complete innocents and not controlled by a terrorist regime that wants to kill all Israelis, and let’s just say that Muslim extremism is not a threat to the US or Europe or the world. Let’s just allow Iran and Russia and China control our social media, our elections. Let’s just give the terrorists the keys to the car and watch them and the Israelis kill each other and cross our fingers and hope it will all work out in the end.

So you think the actions of Israel for the last 6 month have not been the actions of a terrorist organization? Should we pretend all Israelis are innocent and have no control over their governments actions? No they want to kill all Palestinians and Iranians. Israel does not hold the high moral ground.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And if you're really all about ancestral lands, then guess what, Armenians lived in Artsakh for centuries, but that didn't keep Israel from supplying Azeris with top notch weapons to help them expel the natives.

DP.

I agree that claims to ancestral lands are unworkable.

Which is why Palestinians have no claim to Israel, since they last inhabited it > 80 years ago.

Actually, under UN Resolution 194, they do. They can either return to their homes or receive compensation. And in the case of Palestinians, we're not talking only about "ancestral lands," as in the lands of their ancestors. We're talking about their OWN lands, where they lived as young children and from which their parents and grandparents were evicted (or murdered) by Zionist terrorists (like the Irgun and Alexandroni Brigade) and the IDF. Also, it's under 80 years for many of those evicted during the Nakba. 80 years is very different from 2,000 years.

Excellent.

So Pakistanis also have the right to reclaim their family lands in India.

And we'll unwind the map of Africa to reapportion land ownership to reflect the end of the colonial period?

Splendid idea.

Anybody violently evicted from their homes and forced out of their homelands in the recent past should absolutely have the same options offered by UN Resolution 194. That is, they should either have the right of return or receive compensation. In my opinion, Native Americans should receive far more reparations than the occasional scant handouts they've been granted so far. If you want to talk about justice since the end of the colonial period, we agree.

Things get absurd when you try to go back 2,000 years to reclaim the land where a percentage of your ancestors may have once lived, and they really get ugly when you feel entitled to evict or butcher the people you used to share the land with, but who remained there from that time onward. It's worth considering where all of our ancestors lived 2,000 years ago. If you assume 25 years per generation, that's 80 generations and means we all have a LOT of ancestors who lived back then. The world population was much smaller at that time (perhaps 150 to 300 million). It's easy to see how closely related people living in what is now Israel must have been. My own ancestors probably lived in the Middle East and Europe, and I have distant cousins today who are Jewish, Muslim, Christian, a few other religions, and (mostly) secular. Trying to establish land ownership after 80 generations is virtually impossible. However, there are people alive today who were violently forced out of Palestine by the IDF and had all but the clothes on their backs stolen from them, and they cannot even visit the homes where they used to live. That is clearly an injustice that needs to be addressed.

So you favor a policy that would lead to civil wars across Africa, the ME, parts of Europe, and much of Asia?

Doesn't seem like the most humane approach to me.

Your idealism is...painful.

Land-grabbing by ethnosupremacist colonialists, often accompanied by the exploitation, eviction, and/or extermination of the indigenous population, hasn't exactly been a path to peace over human history. In fact, this process has led to horrific violence, as we see in Palestine/Israel.

Totally inapposite.

Umm (rolls eyes) ... yeah. Brilliant refutation. LOL

Refutation?

No interest in refuting—you’re quite correct.

Problem is that your argument is at best tangentially related to the prior discussion.

Am I to conclude that you’ve abandoned the argument that we should redraw borders across the globe to right the wrongs of the colonial era?

How is pointing out that "exploitation, eviction, and/or extermination of the indigenous population hasn't exactly been a path to peace over human history" not directly related to this discussion? The eviction and extermination parts (ongoing since the Nakba) are what have led to the current untenable and unstable situation in Palestine/Israel. It is a straw man to claim I've argued we should "redraw borders." I've argued instead for the right of return or compensation. As an example, I think Native American nations should receive reparations in instances where the U.S. government has violated land treaties, which seems more practical than, for example, carving out an independent Arapahoe/Cheyenne state 173 years after a treaty effectively granting them a specific area of land was signed. Of course, the Native Americans can live freely on that land today. There are also cases where redrawing borders has, in fact, been the just solution. For example, the borders of what were Bantustans in apartheid South Africa were dissolved, and now people who needed special passes to leave those areas can move freely about the country.

It has to be a mixture of both- the back hills and other national parks that were were strongly tricked or pressured away from them should be returned to Native American control and the indigenous people of Mexico, Canada and the US should be encouraged to work in concert in a G7 type body and all monetary reparations should be made and tribes that were purged from the rolls after WW2 should be reinstated and their desendants are owed compensation. It is also of note though that Cherokee and other tribes who were herded into Oklahoma are free if they have teh money to purchases land in Georgia, Tennessee etc. They also can marry Americans, they have full citizenship and can marry a person from overseas and bring them here. Arabs in Israel can do none of these things, reparations and a right to return are not on the radar, Israel is as apartheid state.

What are you talking about? The 2m Israeli Arabs have full rights. Are you seriously unaware of that? You’ve clearly never been to Israel.

They do not have full rights. They live in an apartheid system rule by religious fanatics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Move on and get over it! ” - when it’s about Palestinian expulsion and death

“Never forget !!” -about Jewish expulsion and death.

I don’t think any Jews or the Israeli state have said “move on and get over it.”

I think weaponizing the Holocaust as you do is a form of antisemitism. It’s offensive. You might think it’s a witty statement, but it’s not true and it shows that you’re holding a chip on your shoulder about Jews and the Holocaust.

DP. I didn't see it as an attack on Jews or the Holocaust at all. It's an attitude that describes militant Zionists rather accurately and, unfortunately, reflects the attitudes of many leading officials in Israel. This is why there is currently a genocide underway. There's nothing antisemitic about pointing out this out.

Actually, it is antisemitic. The most basic DEI training will teach you that discrimination and harassment and hostile work environment caused by racist conduct is not based on what the allegedly racist person intended; whether it is racist from a legal perspective is whether a reasonable person on the receiving end of the comment would be offended. Comparing the Holocaust to Palestinian suffering is a party trick that weaponizes a 6 million person genocide, steals and misuses the term “genocide” and then applies it to an unfortunate and tragic situation in which innocents are killed because they are used as human shields by the terrorist organization that rules their government. Throwing the phrase “never again” in the face of Jewish people is offensive and antisemitic in this context. And no, just because YOU don’t agree that you’re antisemitic doesn’t mean that you aren’t. The legal standard is whether an average person, and particularly an average Jewish person, would find what you say to be offensive and antisemitic. And what you are saying is antisemitic, and we all see through you when you fixate and foam at the mouth over Jews killing Palestinians when you ignore all the other Palestinian deaths in other countries such as Syria or all the other mass killings that have taken place in the world over the past couple of decades. We see you, we know exactly what you are, and we’re too classy to scream in your face about it.

The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide defines genocide. Many experts on the topic believe that what is happening in Gaza is objectively genocide under this definition. Your argument appears to be that because of the Holocaust, identifying other genocides is "stealing and misusing" the term. That's like arguing you can't accuse anyone of murder, even when all the evidence is there, because someone previously committed an unrelated mass homicide. This obviously makes no sense, and it proves the point the PP made. And if antisemitism is in the eye of the beholder, what does DEI training make of anti-Palestinian sentiment? Is an "average Palestinian person" justified in feeling offended and victimized by having all their children killed by dumb bombs and dumber AI algorithms? By Smotrich's "Decisive Plan"? By deliberate starvation? By the execution of pro-Palestinian journalists? By vicious settler attacks in the West Bank? Antisemitism is real and ugly (as is anti-Palestinianism), but here you are weaponizing the term to try to shut down concerns about an ongoing genocide, which is really quite ironic.

Neither you or I decide whether what is happening in Gaza is a genocide. The International Court of Justice in The Hague will determine whether what is happening in Gaza is a genocide. The ICJ has already denied the preliminary injunction sought by South Africa on the basis of an ongoing genocide, but we will see how the longer trial goes.

What I’m saying is that a lot of people shouting the word genocide is inflammatory and designed to elicit an emotional response. But going even a step further and likening what is happening in Gaza to the Holocaust is a gut punch to Jews and many feel it’s antisemitic. Considering that there are people on this threat who are literally calling for all Jews to be wiped off the face of the earth (I just reported to Jeff Steele a post that wished Germans had completed their job and wiped out all Jews), if you’re posting a lot on here in defense of Gazans and think you’re antisemitic, then I would check yourself because you’re keeping close company with antisemites.

First, Israelis use Holocaust and "never again" rhetoric for emotional and political purposes ALL the time.

Second, I'm sorry you're finding this difficult to digest but no one owns genocide. It has happened before, and it will happen again. That word is not copyrightable.

DP.

What a horrific human being you must be.

DP- why? how is this poster being horrible?

there is a disputed quote from Golda Meir that sums up your attitude:
after the Eichmann trial, now, when everyone knows what they did to us, we can do anything we want, and no one has the right to criticize us and tell us what to do.
And maybe she didnt say that- but she did say this:

We can forgive the Arabs for killing our children. We cannot forgive them for forcing us to kill their children.

which is the ultimate victim blaming. the whole Bronze Age religion thing of being a "special people" chosen by the One god has really messed up Israeli ways of thinking about themselves and their place in the world. other minorities your size dont have a country either, Parsis, Druze, Hmong etc. here is also this fictional transference of Christian on Jewish violence done to Ashkenazi onto Arab jews that has no basis in fact. Why are jewish feelings more important than everyone else's? the spoiled children of humanity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the main worries with Israel is if things go bad they will start using nuclear weapons. If you are willing and proudly justifying a genocide why would you not use nuclear weapons?

Netanyahu would use his nukes only if this Democrat WH is at his side, at least unofficially.

What makes the last few months and whatever happens in Gaza such a disaster for Americans: the genocidal and warmongering crap the Israelis have done and will do implicates us. It has already done us serious damage and can only get worse, barring a major change in direction.

Yes, let’s worry about the “genocidal and warmongering crap” and not focus on the terrorist organizations we’re aligning ourselves with. Let’s pretend that the Gazans are all complete innocents and not controlled by a terrorist regime that wants to kill all Israelis, and let’s just say that Muslim extremism is not a threat to the US or Europe or the world. Let’s just allow Iran and Russia and China control our social media, our elections. Let’s just give the terrorists the keys to the car and watch them and the Israelis kill each other and cross our fingers and hope it will all work out in the end.

So you think the actions of Israel for the last 6 month have not been the actions of a terrorist organization? Should we pretend all Israelis are innocent and have no control over their governments actions? No they want to kill all Palestinians and Iranians. Israel does not hold the high moral ground.

Not PP but… you are seriously upside down. Israel was viciously attacked by an internationally recognized terror organization 6 months ago. Which was in fact democratically elected, albeit 16 years ago. So by your reasoning, all Palestinians are responsible for the actions of Hamas- got it. Which would make Israel’s response to Hamas’ deflation of war 100% justified.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And if you're really all about ancestral lands, then guess what, Armenians lived in Artsakh for centuries, but that didn't keep Israel from supplying Azeris with top notch weapons to help them expel the natives.

DP.

I agree that claims to ancestral lands are unworkable.

Which is why Palestinians have no claim to Israel, since they last inhabited it > 80 years ago.

Actually, under UN Resolution 194, they do. They can either return to their homes or receive compensation. And in the case of Palestinians, we're not talking only about "ancestral lands," as in the lands of their ancestors. We're talking about their OWN lands, where they lived as young children and from which their parents and grandparents were evicted (or murdered) by Zionist terrorists (like the Irgun and Alexandroni Brigade) and the IDF. Also, it's under 80 years for many of those evicted during the Nakba. 80 years is very different from 2,000 years.

Excellent.

So Pakistanis also have the right to reclaim their family lands in India.

And we'll unwind the map of Africa to reapportion land ownership to reflect the end of the colonial period?

Splendid idea.

Anybody violently evicted from their homes and forced out of their homelands in the recent past should absolutely have the same options offered by UN Resolution 194. That is, they should either have the right of return or receive compensation. In my opinion, Native Americans should receive far more reparations than the occasional scant handouts they've been granted so far. If you want to talk about justice since the end of the colonial period, we agree.

Things get absurd when you try to go back 2,000 years to reclaim the land where a percentage of your ancestors may have once lived, and they really get ugly when you feel entitled to evict or butcher the people you used to share the land with, but who remained there from that time onward. It's worth considering where all of our ancestors lived 2,000 years ago. If you assume 25 years per generation, that's 80 generations and means we all have a LOT of ancestors who lived back then. The world population was much smaller at that time (perhaps 150 to 300 million). It's easy to see how closely related people living in what is now Israel must have been. My own ancestors probably lived in the Middle East and Europe, and I have distant cousins today who are Jewish, Muslim, Christian, a few other religions, and (mostly) secular. Trying to establish land ownership after 80 generations is virtually impossible. However, there are people alive today who were violently forced out of Palestine by the IDF and had all but the clothes on their backs stolen from them, and they cannot even visit the homes where they used to live. That is clearly an injustice that needs to be addressed.

So you favor a policy that would lead to civil wars across Africa, the ME, parts of Europe, and much of Asia?

Doesn't seem like the most humane approach to me.

Your idealism is...painful.

Land-grabbing by ethnosupremacist colonialists, often accompanied by the exploitation, eviction, and/or extermination of the indigenous population, hasn't exactly been a path to peace over human history. In fact, this process has led to horrific violence, as we see in Palestine/Israel.

Totally inapposite.

Umm (rolls eyes) ... yeah. Brilliant refutation. LOL

Refutation?

No interest in refuting—you’re quite correct.

Problem is that your argument is at best tangentially related to the prior discussion.

Am I to conclude that you’ve abandoned the argument that we should redraw borders across the globe to right the wrongs of the colonial era?

How is pointing out that "exploitation, eviction, and/or extermination of the indigenous population hasn't exactly been a path to peace over human history" not directly related to this discussion? The eviction and extermination parts (ongoing since the Nakba) are what have led to the current untenable and unstable situation in Palestine/Israel. It is a straw man to claim I've argued we should "redraw borders." I've argued instead for the right of return or compensation. As an example, I think Native American nations should receive reparations in instances where the U.S. government has violated land treaties, which seems more practical than, for example, carving out an independent Arapahoe/Cheyenne state 173 years after a treaty effectively granting them a specific area of land was signed. Of course, the Native Americans can live freely on that land today. There are also cases where redrawing borders has, in fact, been the just solution. For example, the borders of what were Bantustans in apartheid South Africa were dissolved, and now people who needed special passes to leave those areas can move freely about the country.

It has to be a mixture of both- the back hills and other national parks that were were strongly tricked or pressured away from them should be returned to Native American control and the indigenous people of Mexico, Canada and the US should be encouraged to work in concert in a G7 type body and all monetary reparations should be made and tribes that were purged from the rolls after WW2 should be reinstated and their desendants are owed compensation. It is also of note though that Cherokee and other tribes who were herded into Oklahoma are free if they have teh money to purchases land in Georgia, Tennessee etc. They also can marry Americans, they have full citizenship and can marry a person from overseas and bring them here. Arabs in Israel can do none of these things, reparations and a right to return are not on the radar, Israel is as apartheid state.

What are you talking about? The 2m Israeli Arabs have full rights. Are you seriously unaware of that? You’ve clearly never been to Israel.

No they dont- Jews and Arabs arent allowed to marry, a Jewish Israelis is prohibited from selling his/her property to an Arab Israeli, it is actually illegal but can sell to any other jewish person from all over the world. there are certain markets and streets that prohibit passage for Arabs, as in someone who looks Arab cannot walk there. This is in Israel proper and not the brutal and illegal occupation and opposition to a Palestinian state which is a whole other story or apartheid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Move on and get over it! ” - when it’s about Palestinian expulsion and death

“Never forget !!” -about Jewish expulsion and death.

I don’t think any Jews or the Israeli state have said “move on and get over it.”

I think weaponizing the Holocaust as you do is a form of antisemitism. It’s offensive. You might think it’s a witty statement, but it’s not true and it shows that you’re holding a chip on your shoulder about Jews and the Holocaust.

DP. I didn't see it as an attack on Jews or the Holocaust at all. It's an attitude that describes militant Zionists rather accurately and, unfortunately, reflects the attitudes of many leading officials in Israel. This is why there is currently a genocide underway. There's nothing antisemitic about pointing out this out.

Actually, it is antisemitic. The most basic DEI training will teach you that discrimination and harassment and hostile work environment caused by racist conduct is not based on what the allegedly racist person intended; whether it is racist from a legal perspective is whether a reasonable person on the receiving end of the comment would be offended. Comparing the Holocaust to Palestinian suffering is a party trick that weaponizes a 6 million person genocide, steals and misuses the term “genocide” and then applies it to an unfortunate and tragic situation in which innocents are killed because they are used as human shields by the terrorist organization that rules their government. Throwing the phrase “never again” in the face of Jewish people is offensive and antisemitic in this context. And no, just because YOU don’t agree that you’re antisemitic doesn’t mean that you aren’t. The legal standard is whether an average person, and particularly an average Jewish person, would find what you say to be offensive and antisemitic. And what you are saying is antisemitic, and we all see through you when you fixate and foam at the mouth over Jews killing Palestinians when you ignore all the other Palestinian deaths in other countries such as Syria or all the other mass killings that have taken place in the world over the past couple of decades. We see you, we know exactly what you are, and we’re too classy to scream in your face about it.

The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide defines genocide. Many experts on the topic believe that what is happening in Gaza is objectively genocide under this definition. Your argument appears to be that because of the Holocaust, identifying other genocides is "stealing and misusing" the term. That's like arguing you can't accuse anyone of murder, even when all the evidence is there, because someone previously committed an unrelated mass homicide. This obviously makes no sense, and it proves the point the PP made. And if antisemitism is in the eye of the beholder, what does DEI training make of anti-Palestinian sentiment? Is an "average Palestinian person" justified in feeling offended and victimized by having all their children killed by dumb bombs and dumber AI algorithms? By Smotrich's "Decisive Plan"? By deliberate starvation? By the execution of pro-Palestinian journalists? By vicious settler attacks in the West Bank? Antisemitism is real and ugly (as is anti-Palestinianism), but here you are weaponizing the term to try to shut down concerns about an ongoing genocide, which is really quite ironic.

Neither you or I decide whether what is happening in Gaza is a genocide. The International Court of Justice in The Hague will determine whether what is happening in Gaza is a genocide. The ICJ has already denied the preliminary injunction sought by South Africa on the basis of an ongoing genocide, but we will see how the longer trial goes.

What I’m saying is that a lot of people shouting the word genocide is inflammatory and designed to elicit an emotional response. But going even a step further and likening what is happening in Gaza to the Holocaust is a gut punch to Jews and many feel it’s antisemitic. Considering that there are people on this threat who are literally calling for all Jews to be wiped off the face of the earth (I just reported to Jeff Steele a post that wished Germans had completed their job and wiped out all Jews), if you’re posting a lot on here in defense of Gazans and think you’re antisemitic, then I would check yourself because you’re keeping close company with antisemites.

First, Israelis use Holocaust and "never again" rhetoric for emotional and political purposes ALL the time.

Second, I'm sorry you're finding this difficult to digest but no one owns genocide. It has happened before, and it will happen again. That word is not copyrightable.

DP.

What a horrific human being you must be.

DP- why? how is this poster being horrible?

there is a disputed quote from Golda Meir that sums up your attitude:
after the Eichmann trial, now, when everyone knows what they did to us, we can do anything we want, and no one has the right to criticize us and tell us what to do.
And maybe she didnt say that- but she did say this:

We can forgive the Arabs for killing our children. We cannot forgive them for forcing us to kill their children.

which is the ultimate victim blaming. the whole Bronze Age religion thing of being a "special people" chosen by the One god has really messed up Israeli ways of thinking about themselves and their place in the world. other minorities your size dont have a country either, Parsis, Druze, Hmong etc. here is also this fictional transference of Christian on Jewish violence done to Ashkenazi onto Arab jews that has no basis in fact. Why are jewish feelings more important than everyone else's? the spoiled children of humanity.

Weaponizing the Holocaust against Israelis is a genuinely awful thing to do.

And arguing that Israelis use the term "never again" and therefore it's appropriate for others to use it against Israel?

Well, IMO, that's the equivalent of saying "some Black people call each other the 'N' word, so I can use it too".

Bad form to use other peoples' past trauma to attack them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And if you're really all about ancestral lands, then guess what, Armenians lived in Artsakh for centuries, but that didn't keep Israel from supplying Azeris with top notch weapons to help them expel the natives.

DP.

I agree that claims to ancestral lands are unworkable.

Which is why Palestinians have no claim to Israel, since they last inhabited it > 80 years ago.

Actually, under UN Resolution 194, they do. They can either return to their homes or receive compensation. And in the case of Palestinians, we're not talking only about "ancestral lands," as in the lands of their ancestors. We're talking about their OWN lands, where they lived as young children and from which their parents and grandparents were evicted (or murdered) by Zionist terrorists (like the Irgun and Alexandroni Brigade) and the IDF. Also, it's under 80 years for many of those evicted during the Nakba. 80 years is very different from 2,000 years.

Excellent.

So Pakistanis also have the right to reclaim their family lands in India.

And we'll unwind the map of Africa to reapportion land ownership to reflect the end of the colonial period?

Splendid idea.

Anybody violently evicted from their homes and forced out of their homelands in the recent past should absolutely have the same options offered by UN Resolution 194. That is, they should either have the right of return or receive compensation. In my opinion, Native Americans should receive far more reparations than the occasional scant handouts they've been granted so far. If you want to talk about justice since the end of the colonial period, we agree.

Things get absurd when you try to go back 2,000 years to reclaim the land where a percentage of your ancestors may have once lived, and they really get ugly when you feel entitled to evict or butcher the people you used to share the land with, but who remained there from that time onward. It's worth considering where all of our ancestors lived 2,000 years ago. If you assume 25 years per generation, that's 80 generations and means we all have a LOT of ancestors who lived back then. The world population was much smaller at that time (perhaps 150 to 300 million). It's easy to see how closely related people living in what is now Israel must have been. My own ancestors probably lived in the Middle East and Europe, and I have distant cousins today who are Jewish, Muslim, Christian, a few other religions, and (mostly) secular. Trying to establish land ownership after 80 generations is virtually impossible. However, there are people alive today who were violently forced out of Palestine by the IDF and had all but the clothes on their backs stolen from them, and they cannot even visit the homes where they used to live. That is clearly an injustice that needs to be addressed.

So you favor a policy that would lead to civil wars across Africa, the ME, parts of Europe, and much of Asia?

Doesn't seem like the most humane approach to me.

Your idealism is...painful.

Land-grabbing by ethnosupremacist colonialists, often accompanied by the exploitation, eviction, and/or extermination of the indigenous population, hasn't exactly been a path to peace over human history. In fact, this process has led to horrific violence, as we see in Palestine/Israel.

Totally inapposite.

Umm (rolls eyes) ... yeah. Brilliant refutation. LOL

Refutation?

No interest in refuting—you’re quite correct.

Problem is that your argument is at best tangentially related to the prior discussion.

Am I to conclude that you’ve abandoned the argument that we should redraw borders across the globe to right the wrongs of the colonial era?

How is pointing out that "exploitation, eviction, and/or extermination of the indigenous population hasn't exactly been a path to peace over human history" not directly related to this discussion? The eviction and extermination parts (ongoing since the Nakba) are what have led to the current untenable and unstable situation in Palestine/Israel. It is a straw man to claim I've argued we should "redraw borders." I've argued instead for the right of return or compensation. As an example, I think Native American nations should receive reparations in instances where the U.S. government has violated land treaties, which seems more practical than, for example, carving out an independent Arapahoe/Cheyenne state 173 years after a treaty effectively granting them a specific area of land was signed. Of course, the Native Americans can live freely on that land today. There are also cases where redrawing borders has, in fact, been the just solution. For example, the borders of what were Bantustans in apartheid South Africa were dissolved, and now people who needed special passes to leave those areas can move freely about the country.

It has to be a mixture of both- the back hills and other national parks that were were strongly tricked or pressured away from them should be returned to Native American control and the indigenous people of Mexico, Canada and the US should be encouraged to work in concert in a G7 type body and all monetary reparations should be made and tribes that were purged from the rolls after WW2 should be reinstated and their desendants are owed compensation. It is also of note though that Cherokee and other tribes who were herded into Oklahoma are free if they have teh money to purchases land in Georgia, Tennessee etc. They also can marry Americans, they have full citizenship and can marry a person from overseas and bring them here. Arabs in Israel can do none of these things, reparations and a right to return are not on the radar, Israel is as apartheid state.

What are you talking about? The 2m Israeli Arabs have full rights. Are you seriously unaware of that? You’ve clearly never been to Israel.

No they dont- Jews and Arabs arent allowed to marry, a Jewish Israelis is prohibited from selling his/her property to an Arab Israeli, it is actually illegal but can sell to any other jewish person from all over the world. there are certain markets and streets that prohibit passage for Arabs, as in someone who looks Arab cannot walk there. This is in Israel proper and not the brutal and illegal occupation and opposition to a Palestinian state which is a whole other story or apartheid.

That is incorrect information.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Move on and get over it! ” - when it’s about Palestinian expulsion and death

“Never forget !!” -about Jewish expulsion and death.

I don’t think any Jews or the Israeli state have said “move on and get over it.”

I think weaponizing the Holocaust as you do is a form of antisemitism. It’s offensive. You might think it’s a witty statement, but it’s not true and it shows that you’re holding a chip on your shoulder about Jews and the Holocaust.

DP. I didn't see it as an attack on Jews or the Holocaust at all. It's an attitude that describes militant Zionists rather accurately and, unfortunately, reflects the attitudes of many leading officials in Israel. This is why there is currently a genocide underway. There's nothing antisemitic about pointing out this out.

Actually, it is antisemitic. The most basic DEI training will teach you that discrimination and harassment and hostile work environment caused by racist conduct is not based on what the allegedly racist person intended; whether it is racist from a legal perspective is whether a reasonable person on the receiving end of the comment would be offended. Comparing the Holocaust to Palestinian suffering is a party trick that weaponizes a 6 million person genocide, steals and misuses the term “genocide” and then applies it to an unfortunate and tragic situation in which innocents are killed because they are used as human shields by the terrorist organization that rules their government. Throwing the phrase “never again” in the face of Jewish people is offensive and antisemitic in this context. And no, just because YOU don’t agree that you’re antisemitic doesn’t mean that you aren’t. The legal standard is whether an average person, and particularly an average Jewish person, would find what you say to be offensive and antisemitic. And what you are saying is antisemitic, and we all see through you when you fixate and foam at the mouth over Jews killing Palestinians when you ignore all the other Palestinian deaths in other countries such as Syria or all the other mass killings that have taken place in the world over the past couple of decades. We see you, we know exactly what you are, and we’re too classy to scream in your face about it.

The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide defines genocide. Many experts on the topic believe that what is happening in Gaza is objectively genocide under this definition. Your argument appears to be that because of the Holocaust, identifying other genocides is "stealing and misusing" the term. That's like arguing you can't accuse anyone of murder, even when all the evidence is there, because someone previously committed an unrelated mass homicide. This obviously makes no sense, and it proves the point the PP made. And if antisemitism is in the eye of the beholder, what does DEI training make of anti-Palestinian sentiment? Is an "average Palestinian person" justified in feeling offended and victimized by having all their children killed by dumb bombs and dumber AI algorithms? By Smotrich's "Decisive Plan"? By deliberate starvation? By the execution of pro-Palestinian journalists? By vicious settler attacks in the West Bank? Antisemitism is real and ugly (as is anti-Palestinianism), but here you are weaponizing the term to try to shut down concerns about an ongoing genocide, which is really quite ironic.

Neither you or I decide whether what is happening in Gaza is a genocide. The International Court of Justice in The Hague will determine whether what is happening in Gaza is a genocide. The ICJ has already denied the preliminary injunction sought by South Africa on the basis of an ongoing genocide, but we will see how the longer trial goes.

What I’m saying is that a lot of people shouting the word genocide is inflammatory and designed to elicit an emotional response. But going even a step further and likening what is happening in Gaza to the Holocaust is a gut punch to Jews and many feel it’s antisemitic. Considering that there are people on this threat who are literally calling for all Jews to be wiped off the face of the earth (I just reported to Jeff Steele a post that wished Germans had completed their job and wiped out all Jews), if you’re posting a lot on here in defense of Gazans and think you’re antisemitic, then I would check yourself because you’re keeping close company with antisemites.

First, Israelis use Holocaust and "never again" rhetoric for emotional and political purposes ALL the time.

Second, I'm sorry you're finding this difficult to digest but no one owns genocide. It has happened before, and it will happen again. That word is not copyrightable.

DP.

What a horrific human being you must be.

DP- why? how is this poster being horrible?

there is a disputed quote from Golda Meir that sums up your attitude:
after the Eichmann trial, now, when everyone knows what they did to us, we can do anything we want, and no one has the right to criticize us and tell us what to do.
And maybe she didnt say that- but she did say this:

We can forgive the Arabs for killing our children. We cannot forgive them for forcing us to kill their children.

which is the ultimate victim blaming. the whole Bronze Age religion thing of being a "special people" chosen by the One god has really messed up Israeli ways of thinking about themselves and their place in the world. other minorities your size dont have a country either, Parsis, Druze, Hmong etc. here is also this fictional transference of Christian on Jewish violence done to Ashkenazi onto Arab jews that has no basis in fact. Why are jewish feelings more important than everyone else's? the spoiled children of humanity.

Weaponizing the Holocaust against Israelis is a genuinely awful thing to do.

And arguing that Israelis use the term "never again" and therefore it's appropriate for others to use it against Israel?

Well, IMO, that's the equivalent of saying "some Black people call each other the 'N' word, so I can use it too".

Bad form to use other peoples' past trauma to attack them.

+1. Good points.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the main worries with Israel is if things go bad they will start using nuclear weapons. If you are willing and proudly justifying a genocide why would you not use nuclear weapons?

Netanyahu would use his nukes only if this Democrat WH is at his side, at least unofficially.

What makes the last few months and whatever happens in Gaza such a disaster for Americans: the genocidal and warmongering crap the Israelis have done and will do implicates us. It has already done us serious damage and can only get worse, barring a major change in direction.

Yes, let’s worry about the “genocidal and warmongering crap” and not focus on the terrorist organizations we’re aligning ourselves with. Let’s pretend that the Gazans are all complete innocents and not controlled by a terrorist regime that wants to kill all Israelis, and let’s just say that Muslim extremism is not a threat to the US or Europe or the world. Let’s just allow Iran and Russia and China control our social media, our elections. Let’s just give the terrorists the keys to the car and watch them and the Israelis kill each other and cross our fingers and hope it will all work out in the end.

So you think the actions of Israel for the last 6 month have not been the actions of a terrorist organization? Should we pretend all Israelis are innocent and have no control over their governments actions? No they want to kill all Palestinians and Iranians. Israel does not hold the high moral ground.

No, I do not think Israel is a terrorist organization. Yes, Israelis do not have control over their government’s actions, any more than you do when you’re constantly complaining that our government gives money to Israel. You’re 100 percent, laughably wrong that Israelis want to kill all Palestinians and Iranians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the main worries with Israel is if things go bad they will start using nuclear weapons. If you are willing and proudly justifying a genocide why would you not use nuclear weapons?

Netanyahu would use his nukes only if this Democrat WH is at his side, at least unofficially.

What makes the last few months and whatever happens in Gaza such a disaster for Americans: the genocidal and warmongering crap the Israelis have done and will do implicates us. It has already done us serious damage and can only get worse, barring a major change in direction.

Yes, let’s worry about the “genocidal and warmongering crap” and not focus on the terrorist organizations we’re aligning ourselves with. Let’s pretend that the Gazans are all complete innocents and not controlled by a terrorist regime that wants to kill all Israelis, and let’s just say that Muslim extremism is not a threat to the US or Europe or the world. Let’s just allow Iran and Russia and China control our social media, our elections. Let’s just give the terrorists the keys to the car and watch them and the Israelis kill each other and cross our fingers and hope it will all work out in the end.

Do you really think the PP was suggesting that?

I was telling the PP through the logical consequences of demonizing Israel and retracting all US funding of Israel. The PP wants us to do exactly what Hamas, Iran, Russia and others want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the main worries with Israel is if things go bad they will start using nuclear weapons. If you are willing and proudly justifying a genocide why would you not use nuclear weapons?

Netanyahu would use his nukes only if this Democrat WH is at his side, at least unofficially.

What makes the last few months and whatever happens in Gaza such a disaster for Americans: the genocidal and warmongering crap the Israelis have done and will do implicates us. It has already done us serious damage and can only get worse, barring a major change in direction.

Yes, let’s worry about the “genocidal and warmongering crap” and not focus on the terrorist organizations we’re aligning ourselves with. Let’s pretend that the Gazans are all complete innocents and not controlled by a terrorist regime that wants to kill all Israelis, and let’s just say that Muslim extremism is not a threat to the US or Europe or the world. Let’s just allow Iran and Russia and China control our social media, our elections. Let’s just give the terrorists the keys to the car and watch them and the Israelis kill each other and cross our fingers and hope it will all work out in the end.

So you think the actions of Israel for the last 6 month have not been the actions of a terrorist organization? Should we pretend all Israelis are innocent and have no control over their governments actions? No they want to kill all Palestinians and Iranians. Israel does not hold the high moral ground.

No, I do not think Israel is a terrorist organization. Yes, Israelis do not have control over their government’s actions, any more than you do when you’re constantly complaining that our government gives money to Israel. You’re 100 percent, laughably wrong that Israelis want to kill all Palestinians and Iranians.

+1. PP is seriously misinformed or purposefully ignorant