Maybe Hamas shouldn't have massacred Israelis.
Maybe it should release the remaining hostages and surrender.
That would end the war they started.
top 45 comments
sorted by:
hot
top
controversial
new
old
Netanyahu has publicly said the release of the hostages wouldn't stop the war.
Did you miss the part about surrendering? Surrendering stops the war.
No it doesn't because Netanyahu isn't going to leave. He's said all of this publicly. He wants to keep troops in Gaza. So someone is going to take a shot at them and he's going to over react again. Occupation is still war.
These are the same guys that maintained a blockade, prevented the winner of an election from taking office, and routinely bombed civil infrastructure. All acts of war. And they're telling you they don't consider this to be over until they say it's over. Ask the American Indians how surrendering goes. Ask the Irish. There's a reason other historically oppressed groups, including Jews abroad, are standing with Palestine even after October 7th.
Hamas rejects the existence of Israel, refusing even to call it by its name, instead slurring it as the "Zionist state", just like its Iranian backers do. It manifests this rejection through terrorism.
Fuck Bibi, but anyone is his seat is going to react to the 10/7 massacre with war. This is what Hamas wanted. They don't get to complain about getting what they wanted.
They killed their own people with this provocation.
Zionism is literally the name of the ideology. That's as much of a slur as calling an American a Capitalist.
And no. This isn't just a war. This isn't simply a reaction. Nothing justifies what they're doing. The common person in Palestine didn't ask for anything except for Israel to take its boot off their neck.
No, that's a lie. Iran and its "Axis of Resistance" reject the existence of Israel, so they refuse to use its name, instead calling it the "Zionist state" as a slur.
Do not lie to me, and do not make excuses for antisemitism.
You can look it up, it's really not any different than calling the US "the capitalist state". In the first few years Israel officially adopted Zionism. Trying to make it sound like a slur against them is part of decades of propaganda to make Israel look like the victim while it pursues a project of colonialism no different than the British Empire at its worst.
This is a lie.
Iran and its pawns refuse to call Israel "Israel", using "Zionist state" as a slur. It would be like the USSR saying America doesn't exist and only calling it the "capitalist state".
The Palestinian claim to the area is rooted in their own colonialism; learn some history.
They've been there for thousands of years. Nobody gives a shit what happened thousands of years ago.
And the "doesn't exist" thing makes no sense. Why would you shoot at something that doesn't exist? Of course they know Israel exists. They don't recognize it's legitimacy.
Finally, repeating something doesn't make it any more true. In fact repeating things that aren't true is a propaganda technique to stick it in people's heads.
Yeah, and the Jews were there before that. Welcome to history, where the people owning a land can change.
Fact is, Israel was formed on top of land owned by the Ottoman Empire, not the Palestinians. Britain won it as spoils of war, just like the Palestinians did long ago. Then the Palestinians went to war and lost again. It's just not their land anymore.
If war is a legitimate way to gain land, then Israel legitimately exists and it legitimately owns Palestine.
(1/2)
Again, nobody cares where the jews were when the Roman Empire existed. In that logic we need to roll back the entirety of the last several hundred years. That's patently ridiculous.
It's also ridiculous to say Britain won it so now Isreal gets to exist, when the Irgun drove the British out. It's doubly ridiculous because all of the other colonial projects from the early 1900's have been devolved to the indigenous people. And no, you're not indigenous to an area after living abroad for 2000 years. What makes this slice of the Ottoman empire special?
@Maggoty
@TruthSandwich is a well-known troll. It proved so obnoxious that no other Mastodon instance would put up with it. It had to start its own instance. The fact that it could do that implies financial (and probably political) backing. I've blocked that domain, so I can't see what you're responding to.
#Palestine
#Israel
#genocide
#hasbara
#zionism
#CrimesAgainstHumanity
Yeah I picked that up a while ago, I like to draw their logic out so people can see how absurd it is. Although not the whole, own instance thing. Thank you though.
Just like nobody cares that the Palestinians controlled this territory before they lost it. All that matters is who has it now.
The UN decided to partition Mandatory Palestine, with part of it forming Israel and the other forming an independent Palestine. However, the Palestinians rejected this, went to war, and lost.
When you go to war and lose, it's not your land anymore.
It's also not the 1700s anymore. We don't do the whole wars of conquering land anymore. Israel does not get a pass on that.
Are you confused? WWII was in the 1900's, not the 1700's.
And, to remind you, the UN partitioned Mandatory Palestine. Israel accepted this, the Palestinians went to war and lost. Sucks to be them.
Remind me again, how well did that work out for Germany and Russia? They held on to all that land? No? Oh but what about World War 1? Oh that all devolved to local rule or was handled after World War 2? Your best argument here is Poland's radical shift in territory but it was a nebulous concept at best for several hundred years and the territory they shifted onto was literally right next to them, not across an ocean with an entirely different culture already there. So maybe not the comparison you want to make unless you like the idea of inviting Egypt, Syria, and Iran to part out Israel.
You're Gish galloping.
The actual issue is whether, contrary to Iran's slur, Israel is a legitimate nation with a legal right to exist. It is and does, as it was created by the highest international authority.
Cherry-picking historical partitions (thus avoiding India/Pakistan) is a dishonest change of topic.
Gish galloping? What in there was a lie? Words have meaning sir. We live in a society.
And if you want to bring in the British then fine, they did that without consulting anyone, it was not the preferred solution by anyone except extremists and it resulted in wars and ethnic cleansing. Oh hey look it's just like Palestine! There's a pattern here...
And clearly the people Israel is currently genociding do not care what the Un said about Israel 70 years ago. They aren't going to see an apartheid state oppressing them as legitimate. Nor should they. After all Germany was a country too and I'm pretty sure the German Jews didn't consider Hitler taking power in a river of blood as legitimate either. Legitimacy is something you can lose, especially if it was tenuous in the first place. Like say, if someone was to keep fighting you for 70 years over it.
Gish galloping is more than just lying, it's generating falsehoods faster than they can be refuted, which entails responding to refutations by changing the subject. Like you just did. Again.
New rule: Don't argue with antisemites. Just block them.
Iran denies the legitimacy of Israel. They say it doesn't have any right to exist and their goal is to make it cease to exist, through genocide.
That is why, once again, refusing to call Israel "Israel" and instead calling it the "Zionist state" is a slur and a genocidal threat.
Repeatedly ignoring irrefutable facts is bullshit. Stop bullshitting.
(2/2)
Good thing your statements are refutable.
BS. If they were, you would have been able to.
I would call the fact that it's literally the name of their ideology a pretty good refutation to your idea that it's some kind of slur.
The problem with arguments based on pretending to be stupid is that people are likely to believe you're really that stupid and just write you off.
Go back to my example of "capitalist state" and you'll see that your stupid nonsense argument was pre-refuted.
blech, no it isn't.
Americans largely do not support this genocide.
The israeli government, most Israeli citizens, and the idf are supporting and continuing a genocide they have perpetrated for decades.
The US is one of many countries that sells weapons to Israel and provides them with aid, continuing over half a century of mutual support.
that does not make the US equally culpable as the Israeli government and military making the decision to continue genocide and defy the UN.
The Israeli government and the IDF are choosing to perpetuate this genocide.
"why isn’t the U.S. stopping Israel, as it surely could simply by pausing the constant flow of weapons?"
One of the reasons is that pausing us weapon shipments would not stop Israel at all.
The US is one of a couple dozen countries regularly supplying Israel with weapons.
Israel has a huge stockpile of weapons, and even if they had zero weapons, one country not selling them weapons would not stop the other two dozen countries selling weapons to them after fifty years or more of providing military support.
another reason is that playing this final card removes any tangible control the us has on the situation politically.
at this point, i personally think a sale of weapons pause is the right idea, but the joint Chiefs of staff highly value Middle Eastern stability that they maintain through strong Israeli military support and are not going to sever ties with their largest and most powerful ally in the Middle East without a reason to (go to the protests).
there are lots of reasons why the US hasn't paused weapons shipments, but this article isn't going to supply any real answers because they're pushing a short-sighted, ill-informed, inaccurate opinion piece rather than critically and realistically analyzing the situation.
Stopping weapons sales is not the "final" card the US can play. The US could also stop vetoing UN resolutions that seek to hold Israel accountable, it could stop providing economic aid, it could even divest funds tied to Israel or go as far as sanctioning them until they stop committing genocide. Israel cannot exist in its current state without the aid and protection the US provides it. The US holds the leverage in this situation to get Israel to comply with any demand, but Joe Biden would rather lie to the media (who happily and uncritically repeat the lies) via his State department and allow Netanyahu to continue slaughtering civilians unchecked. If the US actually wanted Israel to stop murdering civilians, it could have it done tomorrow.
"Israel cannot exist in its current state without the aid and protection the US provides it".
israel is a technologically advanced independent country with a functioning government, they have an enormous GDP across various industries, and they receive economic and military support from dozens of other countries.
it benefits Israel to receive billions of dollars every year from the US(as it benefits the US) as a historic mutual defense ally, but Israel is in no way entirely dependent on or explicitly beholden to the US.
"If the US actually wanted Israel to stop murdering civilians, it could have it done tomorrow."
how? there is no evidence for this.
The US is a third party to this conflict that, more obviously than ever, has limited diplomatic control over the actions of the current Israeli government and its military.
The iron dome is funded and built with American hardware. If the US disassembled it, Israel would be unable to act with impunity towards its neighbors
"The iron dome is funded and built with American hardware"
this is partly correct, as obama matched the billions of dollars israel spent on the iron dome.
"If the US disassembled it..."
the US has no right or obligation to "disassemble" another countries infrastructure any more than Nigeria has the right to disassemble the French metro; this is a non-starter.
"Israel would be unable to act with impunity towards its neighbors..."
this is entirely incorrect as Israel does not require US funding to maintain the iron dome, their military, or their aggression.
The annual GDP of Israel is something like 600 billion now, taking away the 3 billion the US gives them each year isn't going to make the difference you think it will, even ignoring all of the other countries that fund israel.
"this is absolutely incorrect,"
I'd be interested to see your evidence @Varyk
#USpol
#IsraelPalestineConflict
#Israel
#Palestine
#WarCrimes
#CrimesAgainstHumanity
#genocide
none of those sources are at all relevant to the topic: provide evidence for either of these baseless statements:
"Israel cannot exist in its current state without the aid and protection the US provides it".
this statement is incorrect, as explained above.
"If the US actually wanted Israel to stop murdering civilians, it could have it done tomorrow."
this statement is incorrect, as explained above.
I didn't mention any "sources" @Varyk
I said that I'd be interested to see your evidence. You've tacitly conceded that you have none.
#USpol
#IsraelPalestineConflict
#Israel
#Palestine
#WarCrimes
#CrimesAgainstHumanity
#genocide
if you don't understand the comments or you're confused, ask for help.
which part don't you understand or cannot find sources for?
"Israel cannot exist in its current state without the aid and protection the US provides it".
israel is a technologically advanced independent country with a functioning government, they have an enormous GDP across various industries, and they receive economic and military support from dozens of other countries.
it benefits Israel to receive billions of dollars every year from the US(as it benefits the US) as a historic mutual defense ally, but Israel is in no way entirely dependent on or explicitly beholden to the US.
"If the US actually wanted Israel to stop murdering civilians, it could have it done tomorrow."
how? there is no evidence for this.
The US is a third party to this conflict that, more obviously than ever, has limited diplomatic control over the actions of the current Israeli government and its military.
"if you don’t understand the comments"
@Varyk
You demand that I provide evidence for things that I didn't say. That might seem tactically clever, but is it honest?
I ask for evidence to support things that you did say and you can only repeat your assertions. Is repetition evidence?
#USpol
#IsraelPalestineConflict
#Israel
#Palestine
#WarCrimes
#CrimesAgainstHumanity
#genocide
"You demand that I provide evidence for things that I didn't say."
nope.
"That might seem tactically clever, but is it honest?"
I disagree that you making things up and avoiding answering is tactically clever, and it is definitely dishonest.
"I ask for evidence to support things that you did say and you can only repeat your assertions."
this is also untrue
"Is repetition evidence?"
If you were this confused about basic definitions, I can see why you're having trouble.
what do you need help with specifically?
which fundamental facts are you having trouble finding sources for?
I'm explaining the facts clearly with respect to your comments and your understanding of the topic.
that is not hasbara.
If you are having trouble finding sources for certain fundamental facts, tell me what those facts are.
I will provide you with sources.
If you are trying to discredit the facts by consistently avoiding or misrepresenting my argument, it's not going to work.
I'd prefer not to write an entire essay and nitpick points, but here's a decent article I found: https://www.axios.com/2023/11/04/us-israel-aid-military-funding-chart Key points I'm seeing:
- 80%+ of their weapons over the last 70 years come from the US
- we are funding about 15% of their total military budget
- 50 billion in annual trade between US and israel
More importantly, the US is the world hegemon, and is committed to protecting Israel. Do you think Iran would be so restrained against Israel if US retaliation wasn't guaranteed? The US moved an aircraft carrier into the region following Oct. 7th, do you find that irrelevant too? And to reiterate, the US provides diplomatic cover to Israel by vetoing (a power that Israel does not possess) any attempt by the international community to hold it accountable.
keep in mind that the point we are addressing is that despite a hypotheticall withdrawal of all US military aid, in no way is Israel unable to continue their invasion/genocide if the US stops supporting Israel altogether.
"- we are funding about 15% of their total military budget".[in recent years specifically, including the injection of military aid immediately after October 7th]
If the US was to completely stop funding israel, Israel would have zero problem funding their military and their national infrastructure by themselves.
"80%+ of their weapons over the last 70 years come from the US"
It's convenient for Israel to buy US weapons, and the US should stop selling them weapons, but if the US completely stopped selling arms to israel tomorrow, it in no way cripples or halts the Israeli military from using their stockpile, purchasing arms elsewhere or producing arms themselves.
"- 50 billion in annual trade between US and israel"
less than 10% of Israeli GDP
we should still sanction them, but it isn't going to make much of a difference in national civilian life or military function.
"Do you think Iran would be so restrained against Israel if US retaliation wasn't guaranteed?"
no for so many reasons, but tell me your theory.
"The US moved an aircraft carrier into the region following Oct. 7th, do you find that irrelevant too?"
no, but go off, how are aircraft carriers irrelevant?
"US provides diplomatic cover to Israel by vetoing..."
Setting aside the arrest warrants and findings by the ICC, the US should stop vetoing the symbolic adjudications by the UN so everybody can point at Israel and yell "shame".
this should happen.
however, if the US stops vetoing the symbolic adjudications, Israel is under no obligation to listen to the UN any more than they have listened to or have been following UN regulations since the UN and israel were established, any more than they listen to the ICC.
it would be nice if the US took stronger economic or political action against Israel, or declared further sanctions.
would any of those actions stop netanyahu, the idf or disrupt national function?
Not in any material way.
this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2024
50 points (77.8% liked)
Palestine
129 readers
21 users here now
founded 8 months ago
MODERATORS