Iran says it has right to defend itself after Israeli strike kills soldiers
Israel's military says it completed "precise strikes on military targets", weeks after Iran's ballistic missile attack on Israel.
You're viewing part of a thread.
Id rather they be tried and convicted like we did to the Nazis at the Nuremeberg trials, but I'll settle for them leaving, sure. Why must the Palestinians accept their presence when their entire presence was on the mass displacement and genocide of their people? They're not even sorry for any of it, they're literally doubling down on it all and continuing it on a scale never seen before.
Why are you so shocked that militia groups were formed to counter an oppressive genocidal colony? Also, keep in mind Israel literally helped prop Hamas up to delegtimize the Palestinians in the eyes of the international community. It just came back to bite them in the ass.
The population of Israel is almost 10 million people. Much like Trump's plan to deport around that many brown people, it's only doable with concentration camps.
Maybe the solution to genocide isn't more genocide.
Majority of Israel support what their government is doing in Gaza. This won't end just because a foreign power decides to enforce a ceasefire and maybe some kind of simple recognition of Palestinian statehood. There's way too much bad blood, and most of it is on Israel's hands. If this happens we'll have a middle eastern version of North and South Korea. And given how the US backs Israel unconditionally, it's only a matter of time before they re-attempt their settlement of all of Palestine. Because who's going to stop them?
Have you read any of the works of Ilan Pappe or Avi Schlaim on a One-State Solution? If not I think you'd benefit from their findings and perspectives.
While Ethnic Cleansing is fundamental to Zionism, I don't consider it fundamental to Israelis. A One-State Solution where Israelis and Palestinians have equal rights is possible if not inevitable considering the settlements in the West Bank.
I do agree that unconditional US support of Israel and Zionism is the main problem preventing any semblance of peace. A Regime Change is necessary.
How Avi Shlaim moved from two-state solution to one-state solution
‘One state is a game changer’: A conversation with Ilan Pappe
I have not, no. I'll save your comment and see if I can get to reading it sometime in the future. Thank you for the suggestions.
You didn't address a thing that I just said.
No, but I did explain why a major shift in Israel's dynamic is required for any kind of meaningful peace. Just like countires like Canada or America did with its First Nations population as means of mending relations given how many horrific things hey did. I never said anything about genocide, all I said that a lot of land should be given back and if people don't like to live in a Palestinian state then they should leave. Nowhere did I say anything about any kind of concentration camps or anything of the sort.
A bullshit empty platitude of a two-state solution made by the leader of a nation on the other side of the world that is clearly meant to appease both sides of a conflict while wholeheartedly arming and supporting one is not a a solution at all.
Yes, I know what you did do. It's about what you didn't do.
I am not a random soapbox for your political points. If you can't address what I said, you're essentially just trolling.
I know what I said and I know what I didn't say. I said Israel can give the land back to Palestinians and make concessions to begin mending the relations. I did not say 10 million people should be displaced. I did not say the people leaving should be put into concentration camps or anything of the sort. I even gave you a historical example where a colony ended up giving land back and there were no such mentions of genocide or concentration camps.
You want to disagree with me then fine. But don't put words in my mouth and label me as a Troll just because you don't like what I said.
This you?
Id rather they be tried and convicted like we did to the Nazis at the Nuremeberg trials, but I’ll settle for them leaving, sure.
Because that sure sounds like deporting 10 million people to me. Which, again, would require concentration camps whether or not you would want it to.
No that's me responding bluntly to an equally blunt and binary question. You just made your own assumptions and conclusions from it.
You just made your own assumptions and conclusions from it.
If you don't want people to do that, be clearer. It's not my job to make you understood.
So you wouldn't "settle for" 10 million people being forcibly deported? You concede that would be an extremely unethical and immoral thing to attempt?
Articulating every single response to make sure there is no confusion from random people from all over the world is not a reasonable expectation. It should have been obvious I was giving a simple basic answer in response to a basic question.
Challenging my views and expecting me to better explain it is something that is appropriate. Insisting your pre-drawn conclusions was correct after I repeatedly explained myself and then calling me troll was not appropriate.
And no once again I don't advocate for forced settlements, concentration camps, or whatever inhumane accusation you want to throw at me. I said Israel needs to make serious concessions by way of giving a lot of land back. What the political way to achieve this is something you and I can go back and forth for a long time but is ultimately a moot point given the current political climate.
I've always thought a disarmed single state solution with a protected right of return to the country (not the specific land parcel) would be a hilarious end to Israel. Let actual democracy destroy the apartheid state.
I would be fine with that too.
Okay, so where should they go? If Israel is dissolved and the territory handed back to the Palestinian people, there will be a massive ethnic cleansing at the hands of Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran. Extracting every single Israeli would create yet another refugee crisis somewhere in the world - speaking strictly in terms of how to materially support all these people.
That the lame excuse that was also used to justify maintaining the apartheid in south africa
You're right, which is why we should stop these three genocidal terrorist regimes from clearing out Israel.
Wherever they want. Why is it on Palestine, Lebanon, or anyone else to figure out this problem that Israel created in the first place?
That will require an agreement with the host nations. That is not guaranteed by any means, nor is their safety before, during, or after the evacuation.
Why are you so sure, have they tried before?
It's not impossible, but I'm saying it isn't guaranteed to be successful. I doubt Israel will agree to this arrangement, and I don't know what nations will be willing to host them indefinitely. And given that Osama bin Laden orchestrated 9/11 partly because of the US's alliance with the Jews, do you think these groups that hate Jews so much won't consider striking their new homes?
The "Death to Israel" chants and hatred to Israel as an anti-zionist expression, not an anti-semitic one. This isn't a conflict between Muslims and Jews. It's one between Arabs and Zionist extremists.
It's a conflict that caused Hamas to rape and kill 1,500 people, including children, and launch tens of thousands of rockets indiscriminately into Israel. I guess the victims were all Zionist extremists, though.
Before I address your comment I just want to point out that a lot of the accusations about what was done by Hamas on Oct 7th was later debunked. Was it bad? Yes. Was it as bad as Israel made the world to believe? No.
And Oct 7th was not the beginning of the conflict. Israel was oppressing and systemically cleansing the Palestinian population for a long time. The only new thing Oct 7th introduced was that the civilians dying were white and not brown. Israel doesn't have the right to call themselves some kind of victim, not after all they've done.
Here is a response to Al-Jazeera's October 7 documentary. And Hamas is still holding hostages from that day. Or is this whole article "pro-Israel propaganda"?
Oct 7th was what kicked this most recent madness off. If that didn't happen, Gaza would likely not have been leveled and many would not have died, to name a few things. Hamas started this fight in particular, and it's going to end one way or another.
You're link doesn't discredit Al-Jazeeras claims. It just tries to discredit Al-Jazeera itself for being biased while being very biased itself. I would have taken it more seriously if it actually tried to explain why Al-Jazeera was wrong. Sorry, not buying it.
Like I said above. Oct 7th wasn't the beginning of this conflict. And Gaza was being wiped out before it, just more slowly and a lot more quietly.
Hamas didn't start this fight, they're just fighting back for their freedom and very lives.
I hear that the moon has good weather this time of year.
So you do want to kill every Israeli. Thanks for your honesty.
I'd honestly prefer that they stop indiscriminately bombing schools and hospitals full of displaced Palestinians. Failing that, the moon sounds like a right fine spot to put them.
The IDF has about 634,000 personnel in total, but I suppose the other ~90% of the country that isn't shooting the rockets has to go too. Osama bin Laden would be so happy to hear you say that.
