Killed if Ukrainian, Died if Palestinian
this post was submitted on 11 Feb 2024
412 points (85.0% liked)
A Boring Dystopia
9720 readers
200 users here now
Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.
Rules (Subject to Change)
--Be a Decent Human Being
--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title
--Posts must have something to do with the topic
--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.
--No NSFW content
--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Wow such a two sided affair. Someone comes into their land and decides to violently steal it. And then the other side fights back. This must mean that both sides are at fault. Another amazing analysis.
Israel terrorizes and colonizes the west bank, and the people there fight back. This must mean both sides are at fault!
A very nuanced analysis thank you for your input once again.
Again, this is misinformation. It's particularly concerning that you are accusing me of not being nuanced when your uncharitable interpretation of the conflict seems to suggest that Israel never had a right to be there in the first place.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandatory_Palestine
"After an Arab uprising against the Ottoman Empire arose during the First World War in 1916, British forces drove Ottoman forces out of the Levant.[3] The United Kingdom had agreed in the McMahon–Hussein Correspondence that it would honour Arab independence in case of a revolt, but in the end, the United Kingdom and France divided what had been what had been Ottoman Syria under the Sykes–Picot Agreement—an act of betrayal in the eyes of the Arabs."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration
"The intended boundaries of Palestine were not specified, and the British government later confirmed that the words "in Palestine" meant that the Jewish national home was not intended to cover all of Palestine. The second half of the declaration was added to satisfy opponents of the policy, who had claimed that it would otherwise prejudice the position of the local population of Palestine and encourage antisemitism worldwide by "stamping the Jews as strangers in their native lands"."
Your ire should be directed at the British protectorate for the ambiguity that enabled both sides to feel justified in their believed independence. This initial blunder seems to me to have fostered mutual extremism.
I mean yes. Israel has been from the get go, ever since the planning stage, a settler colonialist Apartheid state. The sales pitch has always been "Let's steal Palestinian lands and make them second class citizens".
You mean in 1534 when they were permitted by Ottomans to establish a Jewish City-State?
Or maybe you mean in 1821 when the Jewish adviser and finance minister to the rulers of the Galilee, Haim Farkhi, was murdered and the Ottomans allowed their army to conquer Galilee?
Or maybe you mean in the late 19th century when they bought land from the Ottomans and peacefully settled?
Or maybe you mean in 1917 when the Ottomans deported them from Tel Aviv and Gaffa because the Ottomans were at war with the lands they immigrated from?
Or maybe you mean after 1917 when the obscure instructions of the British Mandate radicalized all of their Arab neighbors against them and galvanized the call to the violent eradication of Israel?
Or maybe you mean in 1921 and 1929 when Arab mobs violently attacked Jewish population centers?
Or maybe you mean in 1936-1939 when Arabs launched widespread attacks on both the British and the Jews?
Is it blatantly obvious how ridiculous your claim is yet, or do I need to keep going?
I'm not even sure what these have to do with modern Israel, which is ideologically a late 19th/early 20th endeavor.
Everything since 1917 was with the intention of creating a Jewish-majority state in Palestine. Palestine that's, for obvious reasons, populated with Palestinians basically everywhere. You can't have a Jewish majority state in Palestine without kicking Palestinians out of their home; it's just not physically possible. And then you had a "Jewish state" with as many Jews and as few Palestinians as possible. Does that sound like the blueprint for an egalitarian state?
You don't think that the established Jewish territory prior to and during the 20th century has anything to do with modern Israel? You think that the revitalization of a Jewish homeland was unique to Zionist ideology when their occupation of both Galilee and Jerusalem was sanctioned by the Ottomans in 1534-1742?
Of course you can, you just need more than one state. This had been the plan instituted by the British, but the British Mandatory authorities strayed from the plan as I already stated.
No, because like I said you can't have a state without a majority, or at least a significant minority, of Palestinians. It's geographically impossible. That goes directly counter to the Zionist goal of a Jewish state with as many Jews and as few Palestinians as possible.
Completely baseless. Take it up with the British Mandate authority and the League of Nations that wanted them to be able to stand on their own.
I mean yes I do think the British and the League of Nations are as responsible for the current state of Palestine as Zionists.
It's a hard problem to solve. Every time Jews had established themselves in the area they got conquered or kicked out, who's to say it wouldn't have just happened again? And it doesn't help that 5 Arab nations initiated a war of extermination before Zionists had the chance to expose these alleged intentions of ethnic-cleansing. In fact, Israel's actions of returning land they had captured whenever Arabs went to war with them seemed to be in direct contradiction of the allegations.
When I examine the entire chain of events, I see two sides that had unrelenting ideologies. Not one.
What? Palestine has had Jews ever since the Arab conquest.
Uh... There had been numerous massacres before Arab involvement in the war. Remember Dier Yassin?
Uh... What? Israel definitely didn't return that land because they wanted to. Just look at the Golan Heights.
And? Babylonian, Greek, Roman, and Byzantine conquests? Crusades? Ottomans deporting them from Tel Aviv and Gaffa? We just went over this, keep up.
Remember the Hebron massacre in 1929 and 1936-1939 Arab revolt in Palestine that I mentioned? Remember the Hebron massacre of 1834? 1921 Jaffa riots? Stop playing games.
"According to the Israeli Yehoshafat Harkabi, Plan Dalet called for the conquest of Arab towns and villages inside and along the borders of the area allocated to the proposed Jewish State in the UN Partition Plan.[4] In case of resistance, the population of conquered villages was to be expelled outside the borders of the Jewish state. If no resistance was met, the residents could stay put, under military rule.[qt 1][5][6][7]"
Nonviolent occupation under UN sanctions. Really spooky stuff.
You're going to have to provide sources for this. You're genuinely coming across as extremely predisposed to pardon any attempt of complete, violent obliteration by Israel's neighbors. It's fascinating to watch though.
Those are all Europeans. They have 0 relation to anybody in the region today (except the Ottomans who are in kind of a weird spot).
Nonviolent. Nonviolent? Do you believe what you just said?
Uh... Egypt had to declare a whole other war to get Israel to give back Sinai. The Golan heights are effectively Israeli territory today. Palestinians needed the first Intifada to get a semblance of nominal independence. Israel never gave back anything willingly.
Anyway I won't engage any further, but you need some serious introspection if you actually believe the nonsense you just said.
You're the one living in lala land where the British didn't over promise after the collapse of an empire and you'll only condemn one side of alleged genocide. It was just those filthy colonizers.
I don't believe it, I know it. The sources are very clear. And I can find many more examples of Jews being treated like second class citizens by Arabs, not just Europeans. How preposterous for you to even refute. Ever heard of a dhimmi? You want to talk about apartheid then let's talk about that instead of you making baseless claim after baseless claim.
BTW I just wanted to share some quotes and information with you since you seem to think Plan Dalet was expansionist and not precipitated. Not to mention those villages were either actively or imminently hostile.