Only insofar as such a reckoning is compatible with victor's justice. Which suggests at least one way forward, albeit with great difficulty.
Conflict between Palestine and Israel escalates
- Thread starter dreng3
- Start date
As if we (or Israel) were actually a signatory or participant of the ICC. This is precisely why.
Of course, we'd turn the Netherlands into a green glowing glass parking lot the moment a US politician or military officer saw the inside of The Hague from behind bars, but that's neither here nor there.
You live on dispossessed land, as do I, as do a lot of countries, so I don't see how this is even an argument to begin while you continue to benefit from such land without quibble. Second, what were the circumstances by which Israel acquired the land they currently occupy? Can you tell me if you know that?
And finally. Do you really fucking think most countries would not initiate an aggressive response like Israel did after experiencing a terrorist attack that saw the raping and murder of over 1000 people, not to mention, during a festival that was promoting peace between the two states? An attack carried out by the ruling body of another state? Really? You know very well that wars have been started over less. WW1 started over the deaths of two people killed by someone who's country was under the rule of another country.
And if you REALLY want to play the game of people dispossessed of their land, we can go back 2000 years to when the Jews themselves were forced out of that land.
When did I ever say that Israel is free to do as it pleases? This is exactly my issue. So many of you take my attempts to show that this is not a black and white situation as me putting full support behind a side. Consider that perhaps if people did not put their full trust behind a literal terrorist organization, to the point that all of you STILL believe in that hospital bombing, as just one example, then I wouldn't NEED to go to bat so hard for Israel and Jewish people in general.
Currently it could be boiled down to that in a general sense, but it’s still rooted as a religious conflict. Genesis 15:18. The Holy Land. It sure it getting holier with all this bombing now too. The evangelists are also having a field day with this as being a sign of ancient prophecy.
Do you genuinely see no difference between dispossession that occurred 900 years ago, and dispossession that occurs within our lifetime by people still living?
Let's say someone steals your wallet, and you call the police. Do you think it's a reasonable outcome for the police to conclude that since you also benefitted from the theft of some historical artifacts by your ancestors several centuries ago, therefore your wallet is morally forfeit?
I can, because I studied it at an HE level. And since Agema is an academic and generally knowledgeable about this period of history, I expect he could too. What conclusion do you expect us to come to from that?
The Australian Aboriginals and probably the Native Americans - to name but two - occupied their ancestral lands for far longer than that prior to being displaced. And their chances of getting anything back is Buckley’s and none.
No it didn't. The igniter isn't the fuel.
Wild how there were Palestinian Jews living there before and during the British Mandate.
Do we think that the IDF bombed that specific hospital in that specific instance or do we just think it's largely immaterial when the IDF is bombing dozens of hospitals and manufacturing consent for further hospital bombings anyway? What, are they mad Hamas accidentally hit it first?
Yes, it is pitiful how a literal terrorist organization and organs controlled by it like the Gaza Health Ministry have become more trustworthy than the IDF or the Israeli gouvernment when it comes to certain statements. But that is what you get for lying all the time and getting cought.
Also this is about Israel and its intitutions, not about "Jewish people". Stop conflating them.
We're 10.000 civilians mudered in Gaza and counting just this month. If you need to counter that with 'this is not black and white', if knowing this you feel the need to go to bat for Israel... Fucking Christ!
Funny how no one uttered shit like 'it's not black and white' or 'it's complicated' in regards to Russia invading Ukraine. And anyone who did was rightfully labeled an asshat. But with the Isreali government and Netanyahu, who's only and most generous response to what they're doing has been 'Yeah, we know we're bombing civilians, but fuck them and fuck you', every news outlet, every politician is all too eager to stand with them under the guise of 'Israel has a right to defend itself'.
'I’m calling from Israeli intelligence. We have the order to bomb. You have two hours'
An extraordinary warning call to a Palestinian dentist starts the panicked evacuation of a Gazan neighbourhood.
www.bbc.com
It must very nerve wracking trying to screen scam calls in Gaza.'I’m calling from Israeli intelligence. We have the order to bomb. You have two hours'
An extraordinary warning call to a Palestinian dentist starts the panicked evacuation of a Gazan neighbourhood.
Sure, if you go back 1000 years or more. Honestly, I don't think that counts.
Oh, you really picked the wrong person to try that on. In summary, Israel was first mooted by the British (Balfour declaration, 1917 I think without checking), before the British handed over Palestine to the UN as a mandate, who sort of half-arsed an idea for the end of the mandate and rushed it through in a way that didn't really answer a load of key issues (1947). Israel immediately declared independence and essentially mandate Palestine collapsed into civil war, with Israel then also promptly invaded by their Arab neighbours. Israel won, and in the process also expelled a huge number of Palestinians ("the Nakba"). Israel then pushed Egypt and Jordan out of Gaza and the West Bank in the 1967 war to leave us roughly with the status quo, except of course for the ongoing theft of Palestinian land that Israel doesn't formally own in contravention of international law.
I'm sure they would. But this is the result of occupying other people's land: they tend to resist. Why do you think empires constantly had to put down rebellions?
Now, I'd be somewhat more sympathetic with occupying other people's land if they got proper citizenship rights, retained full property rights as individuals, free and equal ability to produce and earn and lead fulfilling lives. Unfortunately, that's absolutely not what is going on in the Occupied Territories. The comparison with apartheid is extraordinarily valid.
Fuck that shit. Seriously.
Firstly, the idea that people have a right of return after 2000 years is laughable. The USA does not get the right to invade the UK because Americans should be allowed to have their ancestors' homeland. The UK can't legitimately invade northwest Germany because that's where the Angles and Saxons came from. The notion is absurd.
Secondly, what expulsion, exactly? There were Hebrews taken from Israel as slaves by various empires (e.g. Assyrians, Romans), but many just emigrated out of their own free will. Even after their removal / emigration, they could have returned, but were largely happy in their diaspora. The emperor Hadrian banned them from Jerusalem after a revolt, not the whole of Israel. Of course, we might also note the Romans treated the Jews very poorly... after the Jews kept rebelling against Roman rule. (See what I mean about people not liking foreign overlords?)
We also have to remember that the Jews were merely one of the peoples of that place and time. There were others who lived in the area - other Canaanites, Arameans, Samaritans. It wasn't magically depopulated at any point. Those people - including Jews who didn't leave - mostly turned to Christianity, and then to Islam, and became... the Palestinians. The Palestinians are the descendants of people who lived there 2000 years ago every bit as much as the Jews are. Why do a bunch of people whose ancestors fucked off thousands of years ago get to steal the land from those whose ancestors stayed?
Look dude, if you want to see people sympathising with Israel wholeheartedly, you have almost the entire mainstream political and media ecosystem of your country. We all get that, day in and day out. I mean, fuck, my government has pretty much said it should be illegal to sympathise with the Palestinians, and attempted to pressure the police into banning demonstrations and arresting people for waving flags. That's what it's like in the real world outside this forum, and if you want to bother people with lectures on balance and nuance, I suggest you start there.
(Quick note, it was the League of Nations (as opposed to the UN) who handed the mandate to Britain, though the Mandate outlasted the League by ~2 years. Israel declared independence in '48 rather than '47).
Its also very relevant context that although the British committed a large amount of land for the creation of a Jewish state (in the Balfour declaration), the British had also made two other mutually incompatible commitments for land that largely overlapped: the McMahon letters promised to support Arab independence in the area, and the Sykes-Picot agreement stated to France, Russia and Italy that Britain would keep that portion of land itself.
Last edited:
Ah, here we go with "other countries have committed genocides, it's applying a double standard to argue Israel doesn't have the right to conduct its". That's definitely a take to stand with "it doesn't count as bombing a hospital if they only struck the refugee camp outside it".
Now we're to recognize Palestine as a sovereign state. How incredibly convenient for your argument.
Tell me you know fuck-all about what caused WWI, without saying you know fuck-all about what caused WWI. The death of Franz Ferdinand didn't cause WWI, the ridiculous domino stack of treaty obligations in which Europe found itself at a period of peak interstate tensions did. An aggressive fart at a state dinner would have kicked it off had it not been for some dipshit Serbian nationalist with a handgun and a bootleg cyanide pill.
Well if you wanna talk about history, now's your chance. One would do well to ask themselves why the Hebrews might have incurred such wrath from the Roman empire. Hint: it has everything to do with the etymology of "zealot" and "sicario", and that whole part of the New Testament we pretend wasn't about Jesus condemning Hebrew violence and calling for nonviolent resistance through civil disobedience.
Well, that would be the whole part where you engage in intensive, unceasing Israel apologia over every criticism, however slight.
I mean I hate to say it, but considering UN relief and peacekeeping missions have a nasty tendency to be cover for the sleaziest shit on the planet (lest we forget Bosnia and Haiti)...this may actually be the least evil thing israel does in this conflict.