Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I deplore the terrible casualties in Gaza in this war that Israel did not start and did not want. If virtue in war is to determine what country has "the right to exist," then the US has a questionable claim--we killed over 100,000 Iraqi civilians (60,000 in Mosul alone) in our war of choice. Saddam Hussein had not attacked us; we were just worried that he might.
Not to mention the actual genocide of the Native Americas...India and Pakistan have fought several bloody wars since Pakistan was created about the same time as Israel. Do those countries not have the right to exist? Ironically, Israel actually has written proof of its right to exist: the 1948 United Nations resolution. Of course, the Arab states rejected it, declared war, and here we are, war after war after war.

Israel and Zionists have zero credibility in citing a claim or right to anything based on a U.N. action. Israel has made it abundantly clear that it won’t respect U.N. Resolutions, so whatever you think occurred in 1948 (by the way, it didn’t), it wouldn’t matter anyway.

Second, nations don’t possess natural rights. No nation has a “right to exist”.

Arabs have been saying for decades that Israel has "no right to exist." The natural response has been to say that Israel has a "right to exist."

Are you someone who believes Israel has no right to exist? In order words, Israel needs to be destroyed ASAP?

Anonymous wrote:This is a genuine question for folks who support Israel's right to exist, but oppose what the current Netanyahu government is doing to Palestinians. In your view, what is the difference between what is happening today and what happened in the early 1900s leading up to 1948? For example, why is it offensive that Trump wants to build a resort in Gaza after it is leveled, when most of Israel was built by Europeans over the homes of Palestinians? I know this is very controversial to ask and might descend into mud-slinging, but if anyone could just make a good faith attempt at explaining their viewpoint I would really appreciate it. Thank you.

The simple answer is that Jews are raised on intense propaganda and Zionist indoctrination summer camps, but are also raised to be thinkers, so overtime they notice reality, and it takes longer to uncover true history. Then you’re stuck with, well, the people alive today didn’t create the problem, so they deserve a peaceful solution.

Anonymous wrote:I deplore the terrible casualties in Gaza in this war that Israel did not start and did not want. If virtue in war is to determine what country has "the right to exist," then the US has a questionable claim--we killed over 100,000 Iraqi civilians (60,000 in Mosul alone) in our war of choice. Saddam Hussein had not attacked us; we were just worried that he might.
Not to mention the actual genocide of the Native Americas...India and Pakistan have fought several bloody wars since Pakistan was created about the same time as Israel. Do those countries not have the right to exist? Ironically, Israel actually has written proof of its right to exist: the 1948 United Nations resolution. Of course, the Arab states rejected it, declared war, and here we are, war after war after war.

Israel and Zionists have zero credibility in citing a claim or right to anything based on a U.N. action. Israel has made it abundantly clear that it won’t respect U.N. Resolutions, so whatever you think occurred in 1948 (by the way, it didn’t), it wouldn’t matter anyway.

Second, nations don’t possess natural rights. No nation has a “right to exist”.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Ben Gurion was the first Prime Minister of Israel. Wikipedia says his nationality was Israeli, Ottoman, and Palestinian. But he was definitely born in Poland.

o

You’re conflating nationality with ethnicity.

DP

And you’re conflating claims of ethnicity with genetic testing results that unequivocally debunk the claims. Lol

Jews are still debating who’s a Jew.

You want to respond to my post, or just attack the identity of the person who wrote it? Almost as if your post was written by someone who is being expelled from Columbia student.

Anonymous wrote:I deplore the terrible casualties in Gaza in this war that Israel did not start and did not want. If virtue in war is to determine what country has "the right to exist," then the US has a questionable claim--we killed over 100,000 Iraqi civilians (60,000 in Mosul alone) in our war of choice. Saddam Hussein had not attacked us; we were just worried that he might.
Not to mention the actual genocide of the Native Americas...India and Pakistan have fought several bloody wars since Pakistan was created about the same time as Israel. Do those countries not have the right to exist? Ironically, Israel actually has written proof of its right to exist: the 1948 United Nations resolution. Of course, the Arab states rejected it, declared war, and here we are, war after war after war.

Wow, there's bad hasbara and then there's this post. Almost seems like it was written by someone still in high school.

I deplore the terrible casualties in Gaza in this war that Israel did not start and did not want. If virtue in war is to determine what country has "the right to exist," then the US has a questionable claim--we killed over 100,000 Iraqi civilians (60,000 in Mosul alone) in our war of choice. Saddam Hussein had not attacked us; we were just worried that he might.
Not to mention the actual genocide of the Native Americas...India and Pakistan have fought several bloody wars since Pakistan was created about the same time as Israel. Do those countries not have the right to exist? Ironically, Israel actually has written proof of its right to exist: the 1948 United Nations resolution. Of course, the Arab states rejected it, declared war, and here we are, war after war after war.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Israel has a right to exist just like apartheid South Africa and Nazi Germany.

This.

Frankly I don't care about the mere name of a country. Call it Israel, call it Palestine, call it Semiticstan, or whatever. But if you're telling me that a country (whatever you want to call it) has a right to operate an ethno-nationalist state that displaces those who don't qualify, and has different rules and laws for those who don't happen to meet the requirements of an ethno-nationalist state, then I think you are not only part of the problem, but that you're an awful human being.

A democratic state that provides equal laws, rights, opportunities and protections for all? Call it Israel, and it'd be great. But that's not what Israel is now, nor what it was created as. And I have no problem saying that Israel in it's current form should never, ever have been created and should absolutely be destroyed.

AIPAC created this monster by bribing politicians.

This +100. AIPAC has such power here in the US that we don't have the balls to go against AIPAC (it would be political suicide) to do what France, UK and Canada are doing. But any Democrat willing to stand up against AIPAC would get my vote hands down.

It’s fundamentalist Christians who keep U.S. policy locked down on Israel the way it is. AIPAC has a lot of money, but so do a lot of interest groups. And most American Jews are to the left of AIPAC’s leadership. Jewish organizations are often just useful idiots or public targets of backlash giving cover to Christian Zionist groups that believe for their own religious reasons that the State of Israel must be supported at all costs. It’s short-sighted collaboration by Israeli and right-wing American Jewish leaders, who don’t understand that none of that is good for the Jews.

Look at who Trump named ambassador to Israel this term if you want to understand our policy choices there.

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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One example is the inability of Israelis of European descent to pronounce the letter “ח”(chet). It is supposed to be pronounced as a distinct, guttural sound different from the standard "h" sound of the letter “ה”(hey). This guttural sound is common in Semitic languages like Hebrew and Arabic where the sound is “ح”

Yiddish, influenced by Germanic languages, lacks the guttural ח sound, and speakers often approximated it as a softer "h.”

When Hebrew was created as a spoken language in the late 19th primarily by Ashkenazi Jews in Europe, the pronunciation of ח was influenced by the the German "ch" in "Bach") was adopted as the standard.

DC folks when you listen to an Amharic (Semitic language) speaker you will notice this sound come up a lot and why Semitic people poke fun at Israelis inability to pronounce the “ח” (chet) sound and replace it with “ch.”

What? Israeli Hebrew does pronounce chet differently from hey. I don't know how it's pronounced in Arabic or Amharic, but I also don't know why you'd expect Hebrew to use the same pronunciation as two other languages do.

Amharic, Arabic, Somali, and other Semitic languages are the closest to the ancient Hebrew spoken language.

So your point here obviously is that Jews have no connection to the Middle East and in fact they're all just Germans, great, fine, you're a brilliant logician. So what? What does that have to do with how to get Israel to stop bombing Gaza today?

I did not say that.

I have presented linguistic facts and you are free to make your own deductions but do not put words in my mouth.

Okay, what was your point, then? It’s definitely true that the original Jewish immigrants to what’s now Israel spoke different languages (though some Jews already lived there). I don’t think even the craziest apocalyptic settlers would dispute that. But so what? What does that have to do with (a) whether they should have moved there then or (b) what’s happening today?

As for “go back to East Berlin” comments like the one from one PP, I happen to think the Holocaust is used inappropriately by Israeli politicians to fend off criticism. But I will say it’s also not that hard to figure out why there was a desire on the part of Jews and European powers alike to relocate surviving Jews outside of Europe right after the war. (There was also a desire on the part of European powers to relocate Jews long BEFORE the war, but that’s equally irrelevant to what a political solution to today’s problems looks like.)

That’s true that they needed a place after WW2.

The question is—in 2025 does the State of Israel make world wide Jews safe?

What are you trying to say? Let's get rid of Israel? Does driving out the millions of Jews who currently live there make the world more safe for Jews?

DP

Why is driving them out unavoidable if the State of Israel is politically reorganized into an actual democratic nation state?

Because a supermajority of Israelis will not agree to it. The only way for this to happen is to militarily force it, which means the death and suffering of millions of Jews.

The experiences of Israelis have taught them not to trust the Arab world with their safety and security, and you’re never going to have this dream scenario without that trust.

Instead, the Palestinians have decided to use violence and shame campaigns as their tools. You can’t be arguing that terrorism is justified and that Israel has no right to exist and then expect the Israelis to listen to you. Whether or not you think it’s correct, demonizing Israel will not lead to a peaceful one state solution. The Israelis have to agree to it, and you’re pushing them away.

You are indeed correct. Ironically, at the same time, the Palestinians say the exact same thing.

But that's so far in the future it doesn't matter. Right now the international community needs to remind both Israelis and Palestininians that we don't care what they agree to. Ethnic Cleansing, Mass Murder and Apartheid are not acceptable under any circumstances.

The two sides can’t agree on anything so now what? Status quo is the best of what’s left.

Before the establishment of the state of Israel, Muslims, Jews and Christians were living harmoniously together in the state of Palestine. Jews were not persecuted by Muslims elsewhere in the Middle East either pre ‘48.

Even during this genocide we have found pristine Jewish cemeteries in Gaza were Muslims have protected and honored the dead.

complete and total bullshit.

Its not bullshit. Gaza was a residence for mostly older Jews pre-2004 and there are plenty of graves there (Israeli) that the government discussed moving due to desecration concerns. I dont know what was ever made of that, but it was a thing.

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2005-aug-11-fg-graves11-story.html

If you scan the internet past the first article about Israel moving bodies out of Gaza, you would find that it was a thing. Why should a civilized person not think that it want a thing? Butchering 1200 people in a program was also a thing with the Gazans. Celebrating the dead bodies of a mother and two children in a public ceremony was also a thing for Gazans. The Jordanians (same people) who controlled East Jerusalem also desecrated cemeteries between 48-67. Spare me the BS respect Arabs have for dead Jewish bodies.

+1

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:One example is the inability of Israelis of European descent to pronounce the letter “ח”(chet). It is supposed to be pronounced as a distinct, guttural sound different from the standard "h" sound of the letter “ה”(hey). This guttural sound is common in Semitic languages like Hebrew and Arabic where the sound is “ح”

Yiddish, influenced by Germanic languages, lacks the guttural ח sound, and speakers often approximated it as a softer "h.”

When Hebrew was created as a spoken language in the late 19th primarily by Ashkenazi Jews in Europe, the pronunciation of ח was influenced by the the German "ch" in "Bach") was adopted as the standard.

DC folks when you listen to an Amharic (Semitic language) speaker you will notice this sound come up a lot and why Semitic people poke fun at Israelis inability to pronounce the “ח” (chet) sound and replace it with “ch.”

What? Israeli Hebrew does pronounce chet differently from hey. I don't know how it's pronounced in Arabic or Amharic, but I also don't know why you'd expect Hebrew to use the same pronunciation as two other languages do.

Amharic, Arabic, Somali, and other Semitic languages are the closest to the ancient Hebrew spoken language.

So your point here obviously is that Jews have no connection to the Middle East and in fact they're all just Germans, great, fine, you're a brilliant logician. So what? What does that have to do with how to get Israel to stop bombing Gaza today?

I did not say that.

I have presented linguistic facts and you are free to make your own deductions but do not put words in my mouth.

Okay, what was your point, then? It’s definitely true that the original Jewish immigrants to what’s now Israel spoke different languages (though some Jews already lived there). I don’t think even the craziest apocalyptic settlers would dispute that. But so what? What does that have to do with (a) whether they should have moved there then or (b) what’s happening today?

As for “go back to East Berlin” comments like the one from one PP, I happen to think the Holocaust is used inappropriately by Israeli politicians to fend off criticism. But I will say it’s also not that hard to figure out why there was a desire on the part of Jews and European powers alike to relocate surviving Jews outside of Europe right after the war. (There was also a desire on the part of European powers to relocate Jews long BEFORE the war, but that’s equally irrelevant to what a political solution to today’s problems looks like.)

That’s true that they needed a place after WW2.

The question is—in 2025 does the State of Israel make world wide Jews safe?

What are you trying to say? Let's get rid of Israel? Does driving out the millions of Jews who currently live there make the world more safe for Jews?

DP

Why is driving them out unavoidable if the State of Israel is politically reorganized into an actual democratic nation state?

Because a supermajority of Israelis will not agree to it. The only way for this to happen is to militarily force it, which means the death and suffering of millions of Jews.

The experiences of Israelis have taught them not to trust the Arab world with their safety and security, and you’re never going to have this dream scenario without that trust.

Instead, the Palestinians have decided to use violence and shame campaigns as their tools. You can’t be arguing that terrorism is justified and that Israel has no right to exist and then expect the Israelis to listen to you. Whether or not you think it’s correct, demonizing Israel will not lead to a peaceful one state solution. The Israelis have to agree to it, and you’re pushing them away.

You are indeed correct. Ironically, at the same time, the Palestinians say the exact same thing.

But that's so far in the future it doesn't matter. Right now the international community needs to remind both Israelis and Palestininians that we don't care what they agree to. Ethnic Cleansing, Mass Murder and Apartheid are not acceptable under any circumstances.

The two sides can’t agree on anything so now what? Status quo is the best of what’s left.

Before the establishment of the state of Israel, Muslims, Jews and Christians were living harmoniously together in the state of Palestine. Jews were not persecuted by Muslims elsewhere in the Middle East either pre ‘48.

Even during this genocide we have found pristine Jewish cemeteries in Gaza were Muslims have protected and honored the dead.

After the Muslim conquest of the Levant in the 630s— under the Rashidun, Umayyad, and early Abbasid caliphates, Jews experienced several periods of persecution— at times, it was harsh and legally institutionalized. Jews had to pay the jizya tax and accept a second-class legal and social status under Islamic rule.

The Pact of Umar under the Rashidun—outlined restrictions including:

-Prohibition on building new synagogues or repairing old ones
-Bans on public displays of religious symbols
-Requirement to wear distinctive clothing
-Bans on riding horses

Under the Ummayads:

-Jews could not testify in court against Muslims
-Jews were restricted in dress, housing rights, and public behavior
-Further taxes (jizya, kharaj) were levied on Jews

Under Caliph Umar II (r. 717–720): more zealous attempt to enforce Islamic orthodoxy, and many restrictions on Jews and Christians were tightened. Forced conversions or pressure to convert during his reign.

Scholar Mark R. Cohen notes that the often-cited golden age of Jews under Islam was punctuated by outbursts of intolerance and persecution.

Under the Abbasids, persecution of Jews increased in the 9th century. Jews were forced to live in separate quarters. Many synagogues were confiscated and turned into mosques. Jews were forced to wear yellow badges, a precursor to later Christian and Nazi practices. Al-Mutawakkil’s reign is often cited as a key example of institutional persecution of Jews under Islamic rule with confinement of some communities to separate quarters. The position of the Jews under Abbasid rule declined significantly in the ninth century, with legal discrimination increasingly reinforced by social hostility.

Later Abbasid Era saw some rulers engage in violence and suppression. Mob violence and pogroms occurred, particularly when political or economic conditions deteriorated.

The Fatimid Caliph al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah (r. 996–1021) is known for harsh anti-Jewish and anti-Christian measures. He ordered the destruction of synagogues and churches, and banned Jewish religious observance. Jewish religious leaders were executed, and Jews were banned from Jerusalem. Jews were forced to wear discriminatory clothing and were barred from public office.

During Mamluk rule (mid-13th to early 16th centuries), Jews faced mob violence and local persecution, especially in periods of political instability.

-Outbreaks of anti-Jewish violence occurred wherein local mobs plundered Jewish homes. Jewish communities in Damascus, Jerusalem, and Cairo were attacked by Muslim mobs, often incited by religious leaders or economic envy.

Blood Libel Accusations: rumors about Jewish rituals circulated under the Mamluks that fueled hostility.

The 14th and 15th centuries saw a rise in Islamic orthodoxy and popular religious revivalism. These currents increased intolerance towards non-Muslims, pressure on Jews to convert, and suspicion of Jewish religious practices.

Jews paying the jizya were sometimes paraded publicly in humiliating dress. In Cairo, Jews were struck on the neck as a symbolic gesture of submission. Jews were not allowed to ride horses (an elite privilege) and could only use donkeys, sometimes with one stirrup removed to increase discomfort and humiliation.

Obadiah of Bertinoro, a 15th-century Italian rabbi who settled in Jerusalem, wrote of heavy taxes, corrupt officials, and widespread fear among Jews: “The Jewish community here is poor and broken, living in fear of the Muslims, who treat us with contempt and extort us constantly.”

Chroniclers in Egypt and Palestine lamented the intermittent destruction or confiscation of synagogues, the inability to defend themselves legally, and the degrading treatment during tax collection.

Under the Ottoman empire, the oft-cited "tolerance" was conditional and hierarchical— it existed within a deeply discriminatory legal framework that sometimes turned to open persecution and violence. Oppressive dhimmi policies remained and were intensified in times of crisis.

Sultan Mehmed II forcibly relocated Jews (and others) from across the empire— a practice called sürgün.

The most positive era for Jews under the Ottomans came after 1492, when Spain expelled the Sephardic Jews, and Sultans Bayezid II and Suleiman the Magnificent welcomed them. However, this positivity coexisted with— systematic legal inferiority, outbursts of violence, mob attacks against Jewish neighborhoods, especially during famines, plagues, or economic crises.

Between the 17th-19th centuries, Ottoman Empire saw several incidents of persecution rooted in blood libel accusations, fueled by popular superstition and religious hostility. Jews faced heavy taxation and corruption by local officials, harassment by Bedouin raiders and local warlords, and riot and mosque-based incitement which resulted in attacks on Jewish quarters.

From the 17th to 19th centuries the empire saw several blood-libel persecutions, notably— Damascus (1840) and Rhodes (1840), where Jews were arrested, tortured, and communal property plundered.

The relentless cycles of persecution, punitive taxes, legal disabilities, public humiliations, and violence made daily life both precarious and economically untenable, compelling successive waves of Jews to abandon once-thriving communities in the Levant and Egypt in search of safety and opportunity elsewhere— ultimately eroding the region’s Jewish presence.

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:

Anonymous wrote:One example is the inability of Israelis of European descent to pronounce the letter “ח”(chet). It is supposed to be pronounced as a distinct, guttural sound different from the standard "h" sound of the letter “ה”(hey). This guttural sound is common in Semitic languages like Hebrew and Arabic where the sound is “ح”

Yiddish, influenced by Germanic languages, lacks the guttural ח sound, and speakers often approximated it as a softer "h.”

When Hebrew was created as a spoken language in the late 19th primarily by Ashkenazi Jews in Europe, the pronunciation of ח was influenced by the the German "ch" in "Bach") was adopted as the standard.

DC folks when you listen to an Amharic (Semitic language) speaker you will notice this sound come up a lot and why Semitic people poke fun at Israelis inability to pronounce the “ח” (chet) sound and replace it with “ch.”

What? Israeli Hebrew does pronounce chet differently from hey. I don't know how it's pronounced in Arabic or Amharic, but I also don't know why you'd expect Hebrew to use the same pronunciation as two other languages do.

Amharic, Arabic, Somali, and other Semitic languages are the closest to the ancient Hebrew spoken language.

So your point here obviously is that Jews have no connection to the Middle East and in fact they're all just Germans, great, fine, you're a brilliant logician. So what? What does that have to do with how to get Israel to stop bombing Gaza today?

I did not say that.

I have presented linguistic facts and you are free to make your own deductions but do not put words in my mouth.

Okay, what was your point, then? It’s definitely true that the original Jewish immigrants to what’s now Israel spoke different languages (though some Jews already lived there). I don’t think even the craziest apocalyptic settlers would dispute that. But so what? What does that have to do with (a) whether they should have moved there then or (b) what’s happening today?

As for “go back to East Berlin” comments like the one from one PP, I happen to think the Holocaust is used inappropriately by Israeli politicians to fend off criticism. But I will say it’s also not that hard to figure out why there was a desire on the part of Jews and European powers alike to relocate surviving Jews outside of Europe right after the war. (There was also a desire on the part of European powers to relocate Jews long BEFORE the war, but that’s equally irrelevant to what a political solution to today’s problems looks like.)

That’s true that they needed a place after WW2.

The question is—in 2025 does the State of Israel make world wide Jews safe?

What are you trying to say? Let's get rid of Israel? Does driving out the millions of Jews who currently live there make the world more safe for Jews?

DP

Why is driving them out unavoidable if the State of Israel is politically reorganized into an actual democratic nation state?

Because a supermajority of Israelis will not agree to it. The only way for this to happen is to militarily force it, which means the death and suffering of millions of Jews.

The experiences of Israelis have taught them not to trust the Arab world with their safety and security, and you’re never going to have this dream scenario without that trust.

Instead, the Palestinians have decided to use violence and shame campaigns as their tools. You can’t be arguing that terrorism is justified and that Israel has no right to exist and then expect the Israelis to listen to you. Whether or not you think it’s correct, demonizing Israel will not lead to a peaceful one state solution. The Israelis have to agree to it, and you’re pushing them away.

You are indeed correct. Ironically, at the same time, the Palestinians say the exact same thing.

But that's so far in the future it doesn't matter. Right now the international community needs to remind both Israelis and Palestininians that we don't care what they agree to. Ethnic Cleansing, Mass Murder and Apartheid are not acceptable under any circumstances.

The two sides can’t agree on anything so now what? Status quo is the best of what’s left.

Before the establishment of the state of Israel, Muslims, Jews and Christians were living harmoniously together in the state of Palestine. Jews were not persecuted by Muslims elsewhere in the Middle East either pre ‘48.

Even during this genocide we have found pristine Jewish cemeteries in Gaza were Muslims have protected and honored the dead.

complete and total bullshit.

Its not bullshit. Gaza was a residence for mostly older Jews pre-2004 and there are plenty of graves there (Israeli) that the government discussed moving due to desecration concerns. I dont know what was ever made of that, but it was a thing.

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2005-aug-11-fg-graves11-story.html

If you scan the internet past the first article about Israel moving bodies out of Gaza, you would find that it was a thing. Why should a civilized person not think that it want a thing? Butchering 1200 people in a program was also a thing with the Gazans. Celebrating the dead bodies of a mother and two children in a public ceremony was also a thing for Gazans. The Jordanians (same people) who controlled East Jerusalem also desecrated cemeteries between 48-67. Spare me the BS respect Arabs have for dead Jewish bodies.

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:One example is the inability of Israelis of European descent to pronounce the letter “ח”(chet). It is supposed to be pronounced as a distinct, guttural sound different from the standard "h" sound of the letter “ה”(hey). This guttural sound is common in Semitic languages like Hebrew and Arabic where the sound is “ح”

Yiddish, influenced by Germanic languages, lacks the guttural ח sound, and speakers often approximated it as a softer "h.”

When Hebrew was created as a spoken language in the late 19th primarily by Ashkenazi Jews in Europe, the pronunciation of ח was influenced by the the German "ch" in "Bach") was adopted as the standard.

DC folks when you listen to an Amharic (Semitic language) speaker you will notice this sound come up a lot and why Semitic people poke fun at Israelis inability to pronounce the “ח” (chet) sound and replace it with “ch.”

What? Israeli Hebrew does pronounce chet differently from hey. I don't know how it's pronounced in Arabic or Amharic, but I also don't know why you'd expect Hebrew to use the same pronunciation as two other languages do.

Amharic, Arabic, Somali, and other Semitic languages are the closest to the ancient Hebrew spoken language.

So your point here obviously is that Jews have no connection to the Middle East and in fact they're all just Germans, great, fine, you're a brilliant logician. So what? What does that have to do with how to get Israel to stop bombing Gaza today?

I did not say that.

I have presented linguistic facts and you are free to make your own deductions but do not put words in my mouth.

Okay, what was your point, then? It’s definitely true that the original Jewish immigrants to what’s now Israel spoke different languages (though some Jews already lived there). I don’t think even the craziest apocalyptic settlers would dispute that. But so what? What does that have to do with (a) whether they should have moved there then or (b) what’s happening today?

As for “go back to East Berlin” comments like the one from one PP, I happen to think the Holocaust is used inappropriately by Israeli politicians to fend off criticism. But I will say it’s also not that hard to figure out why there was a desire on the part of Jews and European powers alike to relocate surviving Jews outside of Europe right after the war. (There was also a desire on the part of European powers to relocate Jews long BEFORE the war, but that’s equally irrelevant to what a political solution to today’s problems looks like.)

That’s true that they needed a place after WW2.

The question is—in 2025 does the State of Israel make world wide Jews safe?

What are you trying to say? Let's get rid of Israel? Does driving out the millions of Jews who currently live there make the world more safe for Jews?

DP

Why is driving them out unavoidable if the State of Israel is politically reorganized into an actual democratic nation state?

Because a supermajority of Israelis will not agree to it. The only way for this to happen is to militarily force it, which means the death and suffering of millions of Jews.

The experiences of Israelis have taught them not to trust the Arab world with their safety and security, and you’re never going to have this dream scenario without that trust.

Instead, the Palestinians have decided to use violence and shame campaigns as their tools. You can’t be arguing that terrorism is justified and that Israel has no right to exist and then expect the Israelis to listen to you. Whether or not you think it’s correct, demonizing Israel will not lead to a peaceful one state solution. The Israelis have to agree to it, and you’re pushing them away.

You are indeed correct. Ironically, at the same time, the Palestinians say the exact same thing.

But that's so far in the future it doesn't matter. Right now the international community needs to remind both Israelis and Palestininians that we don't care what they agree to. Ethnic Cleansing, Mass Murder and Apartheid are not acceptable under any circumstances.

The two sides can’t agree on anything so now what? Status quo is the best of what’s left.

Before the establishment of the state of Israel, Muslims, Jews and Christians were living harmoniously together in the state of Palestine. Jews were not persecuted by Muslims elsewhere in the Middle East either pre ‘48.

Even during this genocide we have found pristine Jewish cemeteries in Gaza were Muslims have protected and honored the dead.

complete and total bullshit.

Its not bullshit. Gaza was a residence for mostly older Jews pre-2004 and there are plenty of graves there (Israeli) that the government discussed moving due to desecration concerns. I dont know what was ever made of that, but it was a thing.

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2005-aug-11-fg-graves11-story.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Israel has a right to exist just like apartheid South Africa and Nazi Germany.

This.

Frankly I don't care about the mere name of a country. Call it Israel, call it Palestine, call it Semiticstan, or whatever. But if you're telling me that a country (whatever you want to call it) has a right to operate an ethno-nationalist state that displaces those who don't qualify, and has different rules and laws for those who don't happen to meet the requirements of an ethno-nationalist state, then I think you are not only part of the problem, but that you're an awful human being.

A democratic state that provides equal laws, rights, opportunities and protections for all? Call it Israel, and it'd be great. But that's not what Israel is now, nor what it was created as. And I have no problem saying that Israel in it's current form should never, ever have been created and should absolutely be destroyed.

AIPAC created this monster by bribing politicians.

This +100. AIPAC has such power here in the US that we don't have the balls to go against AIPAC (it would be political suicide) to do what France, UK and Canada are doing. But any Democrat willing to stand up against AIPAC would get my vote hands down.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DKSSYYevc_O/

AIPAC’s CEO brags about how AIPAC controls Trump’s National Security officials such as Marco Rubio, John Ratcliffe, and Mike Waltz.

Not that you need a leaked audio to know this.

Rubio will mount the gallows eventually, just like Blinken and so many others who have knowingly, perniciously violated the oath of office.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Israel has a right to exist just like apartheid South Africa and Nazi Germany.

This.

Frankly I don't care about the mere name of a country. Call it Israel, call it Palestine, call it Semiticstan, or whatever. But if you're telling me that a country (whatever you want to call it) has a right to operate an ethno-nationalist state that displaces those who don't qualify, and has different rules and laws for those who don't happen to meet the requirements of an ethno-nationalist state, then I think you are not only part of the problem, but that you're an awful human being.

A democratic state that provides equal laws, rights, opportunities and protections for all? Call it Israel, and it'd be great. But that's not what Israel is now, nor what it was created as. And I have no problem saying that Israel in it's current form should never, ever have been created and should absolutely be destroyed.

AIPAC created this monster by bribing politicians.

This +100. AIPAC has such power here in the US that we don't have the balls to go against AIPAC (it would be political suicide) to do what France, UK and Canada are doing. But any Democrat willing to stand up against AIPAC would get my vote hands down.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DKSSYYevc_O/

AIPAC’s CEO brags about how AIPAC controls Trump’s National Security officials such as Marco Rubio, John Ratcliffe, and Mike Waltz.

Not that you need a leaked audio to know this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Israel has a right to exist just like apartheid South Africa and Nazi Germany.

This.

Frankly I don't care about the mere name of a country. Call it Israel, call it Palestine, call it Semiticstan, or whatever. But if you're telling me that a country (whatever you want to call it) has a right to operate an ethno-nationalist state that displaces those who don't qualify, and has different rules and laws for those who don't happen to meet the requirements of an ethno-nationalist state, then I think you are not only part of the problem, but that you're an awful human being.

A democratic state that provides equal laws, rights, opportunities and protections for all? Call it Israel, and it'd be great. But that's not what Israel is now, nor what it was created as. And I have no problem saying that Israel in it's current form should never, ever have been created and should absolutely be destroyed.

AIPAC created this monster by bribing politicians.

This +100. AIPAC has such power here in the US that we don't have the balls to go against AIPAC (it would be political suicide) to do what France, UK and Canada are doing. But any Democrat willing to stand up against AIPAC would get my vote hands down.

American Jews are causing this tragedy.

the US would not be giving so much support to Israel/Zionism without American Jews driving the financing.

Under the guise of charitable donations, tens of millions of dollars are regularly sent to Israel in the form of "tax-deductible gifts for Jewish settlement in the West Bank and East Jerusalem," the New York Times reported. Much of the money, falsely promoted as donations for educational and religious purposes, often finds its way to funding and purchasing housing for illegal settlers, "as well as guard dogs, bulletproof vests, rifle scopes and vehicles to secure (illegal Jewish) outposts deep in occupied (Palestinian) areas."

Quite often, US money ends up in the Israeli government's coffers under deceptive pretenses. For example, the latest Stimulus Package includes $50 million to fund the Nita M. Lowey Middle East Partnership for Peace Funds, supposedly to provide investments in "people-to-people exchanges and economic cooperation ... between Israelis and Palestinians with the goal of supporting a negotiated and sustainable two-state solution."

Actually, such money serves no particular purpose, since Washington and Tel Aviv endeavor to ensure the demise of a negotiated peace agreement and work hand-in-hand to kill the now defunct two-state solution.

https://www.commondreams.org/views/2020/12/31/us-money-tree-untold-story-american-aid-israel