384
As long as three different religions all think important fiction occured in Jerusalem I don't think there will ever be peace in Israel. Does that mean a Palestinian state should not exist? No. It absolutely should and could.
I think this is widespread myth. This has been a heavily populated region for thousands of years, and most of them haven't looked like the last 70.
Also, I think we need to stop talking about Palestine should exist" and start working towards the one-state solution.
Tell the people building a wall to keep the other people caged off about a "one-state" solution.
You can argue "there are good/bad people on both sides" doesn't change that one segment of the population is being treated like a caged dog...
...And then we wonder why the dog bites the hand that feeds it.
Honestly, I'm not sure what your point is, but the One State Solution is the the preferred outcome of most Palestinian youth and most antizionists. Among everyone familiar with the issue on both sides, it's clear that the two state solution is dead, and only exists as an empty phrase to delay the only remaining option which would give Palestinians any civil rights.
https://arabcenterdc.org/resource/palestinian-youth-and-the-futility-of-the-two-state-solution/
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/middle-east/israel-palestine-one-state-solution
https://www.thecairoreview.com/essays/the-case-for-the-one-state-solution/
That's why Israel has been politically divided. The actions of the government don't reflect the populous as a whole. If we went by your logic, all Palestinians would be guilty of war crimes now. Which is as stupid as blaming everything on Israel. Or blaming all Arabs for the Yom Kippur war, and so on.
There's no innocent parties here. If it feels that way, you dont know your history. Judge by actions... condem the crimes of Israel, but don't let that dissuade you from the decrying the incredible war crimes of Hamas and its supporters the past few days.
Israel’s political divisions are no longer divisions over the Palestinian question. Both sides in the last election argued over which one would be tougher on Palestinians. Benny Gantz tried to claim he’d be tougher than Netanyahu because he’s killed Palestinians before. Neither wants Arab Israelis serving in the cabinet or government. The Israeli left wing has withered away over the last 20 years. Those massive street protests in Israel over Netanyahu gutting the courts was about Israelis, nobody brought up how this change would further harm Palestinians. Heck, the outrage was that Israelis would start to be treated “like Palestinians” under rightwing judges.
One state solution?
I agree, let’s abolish Israel.
I'm rewriting this for a third time to try to avoid cursing at you because I want to model the nonviolent communication I want to see more of in these discussions.
Your comment infuriates me because I'm trying to promote what I -- and at this point, I think, the majority of Palestinians under 30 -- see as the only future where Palestinians are able to receive their basic rights. Which is to acknowledge their land as Israeli territory and they as oppressed citizens of Israel and proceed with demands for civil rights from there. And I don't appreciate glib statements in the midst of a tragedy.
Did the Israeli ruling government set this in motion?* Yes.* Do noncombatants on either side deserve to die because of that? No. Fucking no. I'm just not in a joking mood about this.
And to anyone upvoting this: please take that anger and sign up for the mailing list of the US Campaign for Palestinian Rights. Do something useful.
The suggestion that if Israel simply lifted the blockade and stopped all security operations in the West Ban there would be complete peace is ridiculously idealistic and naive.
You are not going to convince a nation that just saw hundreds of citizens brutally murdered and kidnapped that the only thing they have to do is fully open the borders and smile, and then the people who just murdered them will come out and be their friends.
The inverse is also true. Israel has kept these people bottled up in what amounts to open air concentration camps for the last 70 years, and constantly killing Palestinians for that entire time.
Israel has never cared about collateral damage in their war on the people who lived there before.
So imagine a people, treated like criminals for their entire lives, all because they lived on the land that Zionists wanted.
All that resentment for the unceasing oppression let the worst elements gain power.
The path to change is not to expect the oppressed to stop lashing out. Only in ending the oppression can there be change.
But the Israeli government isn't interested in stopping the oppression. They could have done that at any time in the last 70 years. No, they seem to want a full genocide.
The reason that Israel doesn’t go full speed on genocide is the same reason why they never actually pursue peace. That is, the ruling authority there benefits from having a persistent threat. They get to maintain and build power and wealth while genociding in a slow enough fashion to not raise a critical mass of objections from their benefactors in the United States.
Not only the resentment but Israel actually helped their worst elements gain power in order to cause an inner conflict within the Palestinians. They supported Hamas's growth to cause a fissure between them and the PLO.
Almost every statement you just made is demonstrably false.
This isn't that profound an observation, because the same sentiment works in reverse from the point of view of Palestine. There's no way that they can appease Israeli revanchism. That's why the situation is so intractable.
This is a ridiculous straw man.
Palestinians are the only ones who can end this conflict. It's been half a century, and they have never once been willing to accept a solution that didn't include "Right of Return"... a mechanism by which they would overwhelmingly claim voting rights in Israel, and essentially vote Israel into an anti-Jewish Muslim theocracy.
Israel won't agree to any peace deal that would see it voted out of existence.
Israel is also able to thrive even under the threat of terrorism.
They can wait forever.
The ball is in the Palestinians's court.
This conflict will be over the day they say to themselves, "hey gang... Uh, I don't think we're going to get our land back. And I'm tired of living in poverty. Let's take the shit peace deal and get some land and autonomy, and look forward instead of backward.
There's no other way this ends. Anything else is a fantasy.
And I've never seen the anti-Israel crowd come up with a single coherent rebuttal to this.
The whole fact that you see the wrongdoings of only one of the sides in this conflict speaks volumes.
Sorry but you too are a product of your state media propaganda. Just from the other side of the barricade. And sorry to disappoint you but that doesn't make you morally superior.
I see wrongs on both sides. But I also see that Israel has a history of trying to make peace, and of making piece with their other neighbors.
All I've ever seen from Palestinians is terrorism and rejecting peace deals.
Your view on the peace process is disturbingly simplistic and inaccurate. There were attempts on both sides and both sides failed to reach a compromise but saying that all the fault lay with one of the sides comes to prove that you fail to see the issue with all its nuances.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Ah yes, why shall we grant them voting rights, it is so much better to create a humanitarian crisis, endlessly increase the buffer zones and the restrictions on the Palestinians, depriving them from food, clean water, fuel, expel them from their homes, create even more illegal settlements and then act surprised when they revolt.
Why should we care for civilian lives on the other side of the fence. /s
Right?
load more comments
(4 replies)
Look up how many civilians were killed on both sides since the beginning of this clusterfuck.
You know as well as I do that if Hamas was successful every time it tried to murder an Israeli, those death tolls would be much much closer.
Are you saying that if Israel let more of its civilians die, it would be less morally culpable?
load more comments
(3 replies)
Nobody is saying that 100% of the Palestinians would then make peace by doing that. But doing so would rob Hamas of all its popularity. Palestinians turned to it because they had no other choice; Abbas was doing nothing to stop the slaughter of Palestinians and asking the world for help got nowhere. Conversely, if all attacks by Palestinians stopped for good then most of the Israeli rightwing would be abandoned by the Israeli public. These two groups are not as different as you think.
The two state solution isn't workable, because Israel will never allow a viable Palestinian state. The only three options are
- genocide
- a permanent state of apartheid
- giving the Palestinians the vote and letting the political chips fall however they may
All three options have downsides, but in my view the third choice is the only one that's sustainable in the long run and not morally monstrous. But I have no confidence at all that that's the pathway that will be chosen.
What, pray you, is the nuanced downside to genocide?
Edit: lol I forgot the /s didn't think it was necessary. Your wording was funny to say there's a downside to all 3 like genocide is even an option
Nobody left to feed the cats
Bad press. Gotta worry about stray kids getting all angry and coming at you years later. It’s a lot of work. But, they learned from ze Germans
Guaranteed the Israeli govt talks about it as a viable option, the blasé attitude of their soldiers when it comes to shooting children or anyone not Israeli is an example. They’re just as bad as the saudis, our money lets them have carte blanche for whatever the fuck they want to do
load more comments
(1 replies)
Looks like the author is suffering from amnesia.
Always so interesting when these things happen, every internet commenter is an expert on any complex situation.
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 08 Oct 2023
384 points (100.0% liked)
World News
38987 readers
1567 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS