You've demonstrated time and time again that you genuinely cannot tell the difference between actual murder and collateral damage so I just can't take your views on warfare or conflict particularly seriously.

Did you know that around 1/4 of Palestinian missiles fired into Israel are misfires and they end up going back into Gaza? They've killed some number, at least 8, of their own children this way.

Yeah, out of 850 rockets fired into Israel 200 of them stayed in Gaza.

Nothing ethical justifies ethnic cleansing. — 180 Proof

Jews are the indigenous inhabitants of Israel and they were the ones ethnically cleansed when they were originally expelled from their homeland by occupying powers. The Jewish immigrants coming from Europe were simply righting that original wrong and many were fleeing from Europe prior to the second world war. After the war many Jews in displaced person camps arrived in Israel seeking a better life after witnessing the horrors of the war. And some have the nerve to call these people "imperialists" or "colonizers."

Are you going to demand that the Arabs [Turks] and the Europeans compensate the Jews?
Of course not. Europeans already have "ccmpensated the Jews" by firstly making an egregious mess of colonial partition after the collapse of the Ottomans and secondly then giving degrees of support for the establishment and on-going existence of the European Jewish State of Israel. Any more "compensation", if such is needed (and it's fuckin' not), should come from the dregs of the Ottoman & Roman Empires which in their respected ways had dispossessed Jews almost completely from the Levant and scatters Jewish communities in a diaspora that has lasted millennia across much of the known world. — 180 Proof

Arabs could absolutely be asked to compensate Jews for any number of atrocities & ethnic cleansing campaigns against the Jews. Hundreds of thousands of Jews were ethnically cleansed from Arab countries following the 1948 war. Why haven't you commented on this ethnic cleansing? There were also pogroms against Jewish villages during this time by Arabs. I could of course go on to list these but all I'm really after is you acknowledging that there is a long history of Arab atrocities towards Jews, including ethnic cleansing. You could make a pretty strong case that the history of the Middle East is just one ethnic cleansing after another.

So let's say, e.g. everyone is evil and the history is all f*cked up. So what do we do now? If we just nuked the whole joint that would put an end to the ethnic cleansing (and if Maw is reading this I want to point out that this comment is tongue in cheek.)

It was a reference to an earlier conversation that I had with Streetlight.

Insults? No just statements of fact. You think what’s happening there is justified.

And I think the main problem is: you couldn’t provide a response. Not that you felt insulted. You’ve been called all sorts of things on this thread “genocide supporter” is hardly the worst. So I doubt that it made you feel insulted enough not to respond. — khaled

Not a statement of fact. Complete lie. There has never been any Israeli plot to genocide either the Palestinians or the Arabs.

I could throw the same thing back at you - why are the Palestinians trying to wipe every Israeli Jew off the face of the Earth?

We could do this all day. Is this a productive line of conversation?

lol maw it was obvious satire. learn to take things less literally.

Well, no, we want to discuss the issue and show genocide supporters like you why it’s wrong. — khaled

I was going to provide a response but once I heard this it's just a no-go for me. We're just throwing insults around now, nothing productive.

I can’t understand how you find “Look at all these other countries committing atrocities” an argument for committing atrocities. I thought you’d get the point after I made fun of it. Apparently not. — khaled

Why are we talking about Israel? Lets talk about the Arab countries today, no more Israel talk. Lets make a list of everything they've ever done wrong... for what purpose? Who knows, we just want to make them feel bad! :brow:

Maybe if Isreal wasn't involved in exactly both, it would be slightly harder to use the term. — StreetlightX

Terrible thing, isn't it. But what about the ongoing genocide of black and brown people in the United States? Shouldn't we be condemning that one first? Have you been to Baltimore, Maryland lately? Reminds me of Auschwitz. Come on over the states and we can protest together.

This is not true! There's a huge difference in how Israeli citizens with the Jewish nationality are treated and those without the Jewish nationality. I'm disappointed you repeat this, as I pointed this out a year ago in the Israel and Zionism thread. — Benkei

Ok and what's the upshot of this? Do we wag our finger at Israel and tell them to be better? Or does it mean we should dismantle the Israeli state? Have you seen how Jewish minorities are treated in the Arab world? Have you strongly condemned the Arab treatment of Jewish minorities in this thread? There's plenty of work to be done around racial justice everywhere in the world including the US and Canada. How have you been treating your muslim immigrants over there in Europe?

So, Joshua lead a horde of rabid Hebrew tribes to steal Canaanite land (i.e. ethnic cleansing) through mass rapine slaughter at the behest of voices in his fucking head (and voices in dead Moses' fucking head) more than three millennia ago AND THAT "justifies" modern Israelis claim now to "the Jewish Promised Land" and therefore their ("divine birth")right to gradually reenact of that ancient atrocity ur-myth by nearly eight decades of dispossessing a centuries-long settled Arab population in order to ethnically cleanse the lands between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea for "Judenstaat, Judenstaat" über alles? Well, Bitcon et al, to quote my beloved Hillel the Elder: G-F-Y. :shade: — 180 Proof

Before I even start with this we really need to address this term "ethnic cleansing." It can be used for both genocide and banishment/expulsion, and while these are obviously both bad things the two are not the same at all and should not be used interchangeably. The Jews have been banished all across Europe throughout their history but I would feel weird saying that Europe "ethnically cleansed" the Jews e.g. in the Middle Ages, due to this term's association with genocide. Just something to be aware of.

Onto the topic - What kind of justification would suit you in terms of proving that the holy land belongs to the Jews? Do I need more ancient sources? Is that really going to convince you? Short of God personally coming down here, what on Earth could I use to justify this to you? Do you believe the Muslim holy books more?

There have been Jewish communities living in that area for thousands of years. Hundreds of thousands of Arabs fled in 1948 because they expected the area to be a mass graveyard after the fledgling state fell & Arab armies rushed in. I'm not saying it's all cookies and cream and forced expulsions occurred just as many Jews were kicked out of many Arab countries following these wars. Are you going to demand that the Arabs and the Europeans compensate the Jews? Let's get started on that.

Ok, but I was wondering on what basis you claimed it to be the "Jewish homeland." Perhaps this is why, but if not, let me know if you like. — Ciceronianus the White

I don't know what else to tell you besides ancient/religious texts and Jewish oral history. Jews have prayers going back thousands of years that speak to this issue.

And sure we could take a step back and go "well rationally speaking...." and say that since the Jews are only one group that has claimed the land, what should make their claim rightful? Well who defines what is rightful? Who determines which sources are valid and which aren't? No human is in a position to do this, i.e. to say "here is the absolute truth." So the struggle continues.

Yeah, that's just a difference between us then. But you see how one could call your view intolerant? You're making a universal declaration that cultures or societies need to operate in a certain, secular, western way. Who are you to tell the Chinese that they can't implement some version of Confucianism in education? You think they care?

In any case - and this'll probably be my last post on the topic for the time being - I don't think your view on this subject is insane or out of line. I disagree but there is a certain part of your argument that I can sympathize with.

How about the Arabs countries? You think they love Jews over there? I haven't forgotten about your earlier post btw, I didn't mean to ignore it but I was just so mobbed with responses yesterday.

Not along ethnic lines would be a minimum. I.e. not racist. — StreetlightX

How about religious ones then? Example: Calls to prayer in Muslim countries that are broadcast everywhere. You think non-Muslims love to hear this? Are you going to tell Muslim countries that this is a no-no?

You just said you want to see all countries run roughly the same way and I'm just trying to get a sense of what that would mean. Just give me something to work with. Even if we had the same governance systems around the world the policies implemented would be quite different if we're dealing with democracy.

Indeed I do. — StreetlightX

So would this be a liberal democracy? What system are you looking to implement everywhere?

I certainly think one can implement cultural values and not be racist. Do you believe that all countries ought to run themselves in the same way? No cultural variation?

You're the one who wants to tell other entire nations that they're not allowed to enshrine their own cultural/historical values into law and maintain those through governance and I'm the racist. :chin:

You just don't respect other customs. You don't respect the autonomy of communities. We don't all have to be like you.

You and I are just different then. I don't see anything wrong with a state having a fundamentally, e.g. Indian, Han Chinese, Jewish, Muslim, character and striving to maintain that.

by ethnostate I meant a state that strives to reflect certain cultural values in its laws & policies and strives to maintain a certain ethnic make up. are you mad at India because they strive to maintain a fundamentally Indian state with Indian values?

So are American blacks and Jews in other Arab countries. So is virtually every minority in every country ever.

I'm fine with an ethno-state. I'd give the Kurds one if I could.

Israeli Arabs are given the same rights as Israeli Jews. People in the disputed territories are not Israeli citizens so it's not an apartheid.

At the end of the day it's either the Jews or the Arabs in charge. It's that simple. When you tell the Jews that they need to dismantle their state and lay down their arms then you're just putting the Arabs in charge again and promoting the subjugation of Jews as is routine under Arab rule.

In any violent, vicious conflict, whom do you side with, Joshs: the weaker or the stronger? "David" or "Goliath"? Hint: The answer is fucking partisan. :shade: — 180 Proof

Ok, so you like Jews when they're weak, subjugated minorities but when they establish a state and manage to secure land from aggressors and demonstrate strength then they are the oppressors.

As a Jew I'd rather have your enmity than your support then if it means the actual security of my family. I have real skin in the game here.

Weakness does not make one good, strength does not make one bad.

Ah, so God it is, then. But if that's the case, God's been remarkably inclined to allow others to make the Jewish homeland their homes, wouldn't you say? — Ciceronianus the White

Yeah, it has switched hands a few times. But its the Jews turn now.

[

The Canaanites and Philistines, and perhaps Phoenicians as well, were there before Jews were. We're told that on their arrival the Jews dealt rather harshly with their predecessors. For example: “Then they devoted all in the city to destruction, both men and women, young and old, oxen, sheep, and donkeys, with the edge of the sword.” — Joshua 6:21. Yes, even donkeys. — Ciceronianus the White

There have been some theologians that argue that this was only banishment such as William Lane Craig but in any event who knows.

It's difficult, but not impossible, to name all the others who lived in and ruled Palestine since the Jewish conquest. Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians (and Medes, I should say); then it became part of Alexander's empire, then it was ruled by his successors, Seleuces and his dynasty; then Romans, who destroyed the Second Temple in 70 C.E. and did a pretty thorough job of evicting Jews from Palestine, even renaming Jerusalem, under Hadrian; then the Byzantines (who stilled called themselves Romans); then came the Muslim conquest, interrupted briefly and partially for a couple of centuries by the Crusader kingdoms. It was Muslim/Ottoman territory until the mid-twentieth century. — Ciceronianus the White

Well done with this paragraph. Thank you for the history lesson!

Why, then say that it isn't the country of the Palestinians, but rather the Jewish homeland? It seems to be unclear even God has been convinced of that. — Ciceronianus the White

Well, it works out for me because I am Jewish and a Jewish state does serve as a form of security for the Jewish people. I can't pretend to be a totally disinterested observer to the question. I'm also generally supportive of self-determination movements elsewhere.

The oppressor and the oppressed make this determination. Sharon and Arafat, for instance, agreed on the term and need for Israel' to end the "occupation".

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2003-may-27-fg-mideast27-story.html — 180 Proof

The current position of the Israeli government, at least as of 2011 is that Gaza and the West Bank are "disputed territories," not occupied territories.

Before the oppressor (and his patrons/apologists) can legitimately criticize and condemn the oppressed for his means and methods of resistance, he/they must completely dismantle the entire state-apparatus of oppression now. — 180 Proof

What makes something qualify as being a "state-apparatus of oppression?" Who makes this determination?

Also, your statement would seem to excuse certain individuals of moral culpability.

There's no Jewish Homeland defined except in the Torah which, as a religious text, has no legal standing. There's an area designated for Jews to settle, which area was called Palestine, with the understanding original inhabitants wouldn't be displaced. We all know what happened and who have been driven from their homes. I think it was Begin who said : there's not a Jewish village that isn't build on the rubble of a Palestinian. — Benkei

So what should determine who the rightful owners are? International law? What makes international law special? If there was a UN 500 years ago would you have followed it unquestionably? But now it's word is permanently binding, it's law - ok, got it. :brow:

"You all know what happened." I'm sure you do, just you know all history that happened 80 years impeccably. Have you read Benny Morris on the subject?

Begin may have said that but what were those Palestinian homes on the rubble of? Ottoman/Turkish homes? Byzantine homes? Roman homes? Babylonian homes? Jewish homes again before all that?

I think we both know by now that we're not going to have productive conversations with each other, so can our conversations then at least be entertaining? You probably believe all kinds of fun stuff; I have no idea what the boundaries of your belief system are so why not try to find them?

More often [genocide] refers to a coordinated plan aimed at destruction of the essential foundations of the life of national groups so that these groups wither and die like plants that have suffered a blight. The end may be accomplished by the forced disintegration of political and social institutions, of the culture of the people, of their language, their national feelings and their religion. It may be accomplished by wiping out all basis of personal security, liberty, health and dignity. When these means fail the machine gun can always be utilized as a last resort. Genocide is directed against a national group as an entity and the attack on individuals is only secondary to the annihilation of the national group to which they belong. — Raphael Lemkin

I wonder whether there's a case to be made that the US is genociding black people under this definition. While the black population has grown, an argument could be made that black culture is being usurped and black social institutions destroyed. I think we can both agree that plenty of social and political policies implemented by the US government have hurt the black population.... but is there any actual plan to destroy them? Has there ever been one?

Genocide is different from mere subjugation, we gotta remember that. What do you think about this point? Are blacks subject to genocide by the US Government?

I don't think anyone here would say that murdering innocent Israelis is not a problem. — Manuel

Oh you'd be surprised, there have been quite a few posters here that have refused to explicitly condemn it.

It doesn't make murder right in any case, but it makes it understandable given the context. — Manuel

I understand what you're saying here and I agree. I understand the anger when Israel comes and bulldozes houses of the families of suicide bombers. I understand that the occupation makes life tough. However I also believe that one is always fundamentally responsible for one's actions and that one's own problems or difficulties are not an excuse for wanton murder.

As if the problems on each side are in any way equal. One is clearly much more responsible than the other, given the available force and infrastructure they have. — Manuel

I'm happy to discuss ways in which we could make things easier for Palestinians. I certainly don't hate the Palestinians, but then again I'm not an Israeli who has had a relative killed or lived through several wars where my country faced total annihilation. It's just a very different culture over there. Trust me I've been there.

I think most Israelis want peace, but ssu made a good point earlier where he cited that more conservative groups like the ultra-Orthodox and the Mizrahi are growing demographically so maybe their conservative influence will be felt more.

As long as you're ok with the existence of Israel and believe that the murder of innocents is wrong, your view has a place at the negotiation table. We can discuss about removing settlements and Israel has removed settlements in the past. I'd be more than happy to remove settlements if it meant peace. Unfortunately for the time being it seems both groups don't have much of an interest in peace from a political perspective. Israel is also facing a number of internal issues like COVID and a rapidly growing and non-productive ultra-Orthodox population which lives off the state among other problems. Life isn't easy over there.

It's the reverse, I'm saying it's the best move on moral grounds. Nothing is gained from cycles of escalation (except of course power for Israeli politicians and Hamas' warlords). — Echarmion

I'd be willing to entertain what you're saying with the note that I do believe that proportional self-defense is always a valid option. Both options - response or non-response - would be morally acceptable but I'm not an expert in these kind of issues so I need to reserve judgment for this.

It would need to be strategically justified for me to consider it. If we stopped responding to them and they just keep launching rockets then it's no-go for me. It may embolden them or it may appease them; I have no idea.

Hamas' language is no different than that of Israeli main political party. Zionism implies racism, discrimination and the slow killing of Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. Israel is denying the right to exist to Palestinians in their own country. That fits the bill. — Benkei

It's not their country. It's the Jewish homeland.

What amazes me is why you care so much. Are you an Arab? Just tell me you're an Arab and this'll all make sense. For a white Dutchman to have such a strong belief that this is Arab land and ought to be controlled by the Arabs and in turn Jews be subjugated is bizarre, to say the least.

That's sidestepping the question. I didn't ask whether you think Israel has some kind of "right to retaliate". I asked why they don't just stop doing it. — Echarmion

Are you honestly asking me why Israel doesn't just let Hamas fire rockets into Israel and not respond?

I don't know, maybe this is some kind of 500 IQ move that'll get them to stop and reduce violence in the long run but I honestly have no idea. If you're saying it's the best strategic move maybe I could entertain that purely on strategic grounds, not moral grounds though.

This is telling. "I won't call it what it is, because if I do, I would have to recognize the situation for what it is, and that would be unbearable to me". — StreetlightX

It's just a factual disagreement, nothing more. Never mind the fact that the Palestinian population has grown considerably over the past decade. To me it makes about as much sense as saying the US is trying to genocide black folks through police violence, but then again this may be something you believe so maybe it's not the best example for me to try to reach across the divide.

Was the murder of a white South African civilian during apartheid a good thing? Of course not. Apartheid was still the main thing responsible for the violence. — Manuel

Maybe Apartheid was in some way responsible for the violence, but the existence of Apartheid does not justify/condone murder. No one is permitted to murder people even if they're the dominant group within a racist society. China and Japan can be quite racist towards minorities, especially blacks - can we murder them? The US has obvious racial problems, can blacks go around killing whites because they help uphold the system?

Any decent starting point to negotiations begins with the unequivocable condemnation of the intentional murder of innocents.

If you murder someone because they are the dominant racial/ethnic group even within a racist society then it'syou who is at fault. By the way Arabs are equal to Jews under the law in Israel, but of course Israel like other nations does have racial problems and I'm not going to deny that racism exists. Jews are severely discriminated against in Arab countries.

Israel was safer prior to these last 15 years of incursion into Gaza and settlement expansion in the West Bank, not less safe. This is the result of such policies. — Manuel

You may very well be right here and I'm happy to discuss this. We can discuss whether Israel has gone too far in the West Bank... what is not up for discussion is whether the murder of innocent Israelis is justified or whether Israel ought to cease to exist as a state. That would put the lives of millions of Jews at serious risk. Arabs have attempted to annihilate Israel on multiple occasions and Israel is a war torn, traumatized society.

As Jews we cannot rely on other ethnicities or races to protect us. And for that we need a state. We can negotiate the rest.

Let's weep for personal tragedy to obfuscate the slow genocide of an entire people. Sorry. Not playing. I can empathise with the personal tragedy but once I step back from the particulars and look at the bigger picture the moral position is clear. That Israeli woman had been sacrificed on a zionist altar. — Benkei

It's not genocide and for you to use that term is absurd. If you think the Israelis are literally trying to genocide the Palestinians then there's no point in talking to you. It would put me in a position where I'd be defending Nazis. I can't go on in this conversation. Are you at all familiar with any of Hamas's genocidal language towards the Jews within their Constitution? But who cares about that - weak victims are always good, even if they're throwing gays off rooftops which happens frequently.

How about the Israelis renounce violence as a political tool? Clearly Israel is more powerful and less at risk. Just stop responding with violence. — Echarmion

I only support violence when it's for self-defense and if Hamas is going to launch rockets from inside Gaza then Israel, like any nation state, has a right to respond.

Well Palestinians keep killing our family members too. This cycle has gone back thousands of years and it's likely going to continue. You say the Palestinians are mad and grieving? Well so are the Israelis. How many Israelis do you know that were killed in the two intifatas? How about the random knife killing sprees in populated, urban areas that put the entire country on edge? What about the bombs disguised as wrapped gifts that Hamas used to lure in children? Do you have younger siblings?

I've never claimed Israel is perfect, but any resolution to this issue is going to have to acknowledge that it's not a black and white issue and that wrong exists on both sides.

Expansion? No. Occupation? I don't like the occupation but until the Palestinians renounce violence as a political tool I think the occupation is a necessary evil. I would love to end it though.

Do you support the intentional murder of Israeli civilians via Hamas rocket launches into residential areas?

Yes or no. That's all I want to hear.

Violence against oppression isn't evil. — Benkei

A couple days ago an elderly Israeli woman and her caregiver were killed when Hamas' rockets struck their homes in a residential area. Is this an example of resisting evil?