Israel at war
- Thread starter Butler1000
- Start date
Palestinians could have had all that since 1948 if they were good at politics. Many reasons why that did not happen.
Limited to defending their territory should anyone attack it. I am not redefining Hamas' actions against civilians on Oct 7 as self defence.
a bit of a problem seems to be that many of them think that their territory is the entire state of Israel from the river to the sea
Any non-citizen within Israeli rule should have basic civil rights, barring the right to vote and may be a few others. But do those Palestinians want Israeli citizenship or do they want Palestinian citizenship?
Debatable, but also immaterial to the situation today.
Israel could also have heeded their own warnings about not settling for the two decades for the last 5 decades.
Really, the occupying power chooses when to end the occupation unless forced by outside actors or resistance.
The settlements are illegal per international law and should not have happened. Netanyahu made it worse.
Why, they declared they attacked in response to Israeli attacks on the Al Aqsa and settler terrorist attacks.
Why do you think that can't be self defence?
(and yes, both Hamas and Israel targeted and killed civilians on Oct 7)
Just as the occupation of Palestine has always been the reason their is Palestinian resistance.
And you think only zionists are allowed to declare they own the land from river to sea?
That’s the old Ziontology chestnut of victim blaming. But, go ahead, spell out those reasons.
How is it self defence when they attacked concert goers or residents of a village who had nothing to do with those attacks?
2 primary reasons in my opinion. Lack of leadership to make realistic decisions. The nature of Israel's conception, which was considered stealing land that was not theirs.
They should have accepted the partition, and then laid claim to Israel and it would have remained a long standing border or territorial dispute between 2 states instead of what it is today.
Reports suggest that Hamas was trying to take hostages and Israel responded with the Hannibal Doctrine, which caused most of the deaths.
Attacking the rave isn't self defence, I agree. And if the settlers were civilians than its not self defence either.
But attacking the IDF on the concentration camp walls and trying to resist the occupation is self defence.
Did Israel put civilians in harms way by putting them too close to Gaza? Were they used as human shields? Were they civilian casualties because of Israeli planning and actions or Hamas targets? That is unclear and should be investigated.
War crimes were committed by both sides that day, both should be investigated.
More victim blaming with nary a mention of the horrific crimes Palestinians have been subjected to or the culpability of Israel or the ideology of Zionism. Nothing can justify what has happened to Palestinians. There is no shortcoming that justifies it. There is no leadership problem that justifies it.….that’s another Ziontology chestnut. Any effective leadership that Palestinians had was either murdered or imprisoned.
interesting link. I am reading these docs now. Pretty fascinating.
For example, back in 1947 USSR rep said to the General Assembly:
...the solution of the Palestine problem by the establishment of a single Arab-Jewish State with equal rights for the Jews and the Arabs may be considered as one of the possibilities and one of the more noteworthy methods for the solution of this complicated problem. Such a solution of the problem of Palestine’s future might be a sound foundation for the peaceful co-existence and co-operation of the Arab and Jewish populations of Palestine, in the interests of both these peoples and to the advantage of the entire Palestine population and of the peace and security of the Near East.
If this plan proved impossible to implement, in view of the deterioration in the relations between the Jews and the Arabs—and it will be very important to know the special committee’s opinion on this question—then it would be necessary to consider the second plan which, like the first, has its supporters in Palestine, and which provides for the partition of Palestine into two independent autonomous States, one Jewish and one Arab. I repeat that such a solution of the Palestine problem would be justifiable only if relations between the Jewish and Arab populations of Palestine indeed proved to be so bad that it would be impossible to reconcile them and to ensure the peaceful co-existence of the Arabs and the Jews.
So even Soviets knew back then that if it seemed that Arabs and Jews could not live peacefully with each other, the solution should be 2 independent autonomous states.
How the fuck can anyone believe in one state from the river to the sea today, with the current level of radicalization and hatred? It's plain fucking idiotic.
In 1948 who were the Palestinian leaders that were murdered who had the foresight to accept the 2 state partition plan?
Taking hostages is a war crime. Hannibal if true, is also a war crime.
If those civilians lived on Israel's side of the border, then it is a Hamas war crime.
Their foresight? You mean your victim blaming hindsight that justifies nothing and you seem hellbent on projecting on them.