The Official Israel-Gaza Thread

[Pressure]

palestinians were not free under direct british rule but we are not dealing with that right now so i dont know what im supposed say about that.

brits colonize an area but various peoples more or less stay on land they have had for generations.
zionists later come in large numbers and are distributed occupied land by brit colonizers
locals resist being dispossessed of land they lived on for generations
locals lose spectacularly
surrounding nations lose spectacularly
various resistance groups materialize in this state of dispossession and isolation; some secular and even leftist
secular resistance proves to be ineffective at defeating western hegemony/zionism
religious resistance proves to be nihilistic overdetermined preferred opposition
zionism proves to be a long term colonizing project that does not intend to seriously compromise

I think the point is they were never in control of these lands.

So why are we giving credit to them having more right to that land?

Why do we pretend all jews there are immigrants?

Why do we ignore that the first 40 years of islamists trying to eradicate jews as not having contributed?

Why do we overlook the Arabic assassinations and violent movements that occurred numerous times people tried to make peace?

I don't expect an honest answer BTW.

 

[NZA]

This is the main problem we are now facing to me.

Im not going to pretend like Muslim nations are just peaceful with each other if Israel wasn’t there.(Yemen and Iraq are prime examples)

Nations come and go. Italy isn‘t the Roman Empire. China isn’t the size of Mongolia.

After the Ottoman Empire fell, Israel wasn’t naturally created. Jews didn’t migrate and integrate with the local population over decades. They were shipped over in large numbers. Israel won the six day war and took the lands, but without the American and west backing them now with nukes and weapon systems, I wouldn’t be so sure the map would stay the same as long as it has.

So now we are stuck trying to prevent a genocide of Jews by lowing a genocide of Palestinians.

it's sad that cacs didnt challenge themselves to treat their jewish populations better. there could have been a western-wide reconstruction period to bring jews back up economically and an education effort to make the average cac more tolerant. so much pain and suffering could have been avoided. now jews are placed in the role of villain because of the western world and a bunch of people who descend from simple farmers are now in the meat grinder.

 

[NZA]

I think the point is they were never in control of these lands.

So why are we giving credit to them having more right to that land?

Why do we pretend all jews there are immigrants?

Why do we ignore that the first 40 years of islamists trying to eradicate jews as not having contributed?

Why do we overlook the Arabic assassinations and violent movements that occurred numerous times people tried to make peace?

I don't expect an honest answer BTW.

neither of the people contesting the land today were in control at the start of the nakba

the "credit" i give comes from a history of consistent occupation of the land. i dont oppose zionism for the sake of it, i oppose driving people off land.

i also do not pretend all jews are immigrants. i said "various peoples", when i described the population. that meant there were more than arabs or muslims in the area, but none of the people dispossessed and hearded into gaza are jews. so clearly, we are talking about foreign migration that displaces locals who are not jewish. the existing mizrahi were smaller in number and already had their enclaves before zionism was in place.

the "first 40 years" is people reacting to losing land. who is going to tolerate the nakba? what group gives up without a fight? you take someone's home and then say they are trying to eradicate you when they try to get their home back?

attempts to "make peace" failed because there is no serious attempt at making a palestinian state with full sovereignty. zionism does not tolerate challenges to the recreation of ancient israel. islamic outside agitators will always take advantage of that, but ultimately, they are no existential threat to what israel wants to do.

 

[Hood Critic]

 

[Hood Critic]

 

[NZA]

In its most abstract form, the Nakba is a structure that serves to erase the group dynamic: the attempt to incapacitate the Palestinians from exercising their political will as a group. It is the continuous collusion of states and systems to exclude the Palestinians from materializing their right to self-determination.

that piece more elegantly said what i was trying to convey about the lack of agency and ultimately the lack of blame palestinians have for their condition. there is no condition under which these people can negotiate better outcomes because that is not what zionism is here to do. doesnt matter if you are an "islamicist" or whatever.

 

[Liu Kang]

Hamas is an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood -- a group that predates what we refer to as Israel by 2 decades.

While it is true that Hamas was created during the first intifada, that really doesn't tell the whole story.

MB had been an active player in keeping the region destabilized.

1. The rise of Anwar Sadat
2. The Yom Kippur war
3. Camp David accords
4. Assassination of Sadat due to 3
5. The formation of Hamas

We keep talking about the Israeli response, but just ignoring everything in the lead up.

You probably have a state solution if Sadat wasn't assassinated and shifting power back to those who want nothing short of the Islamization of that entire region.

You probably have a state solution if the Yom Kippur war was about freeing the Palestinians instead of Egypt and Syria trying to reclaim that land for themselves as occupiers.

You likely don't see a Bibi lead coalition government if those events hadn't played out.

But those are the realities and until there's some shake up in leadership across the board this shyt gonna be on rinse and repeat.

Yeah Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia don't really mess with the MB and its offshoots (Hamas, Islamic Jihad) at all. They are seen as a terrorist orgs by them and even some other countries in the Middle East like Bahrain.

The fact that the Arab League hasn't been united further than condemnation speeches despite its population being thoroughly pro-Palestinian says alot on the divisions and power struggles in the region.

 

[LOST IN THE SAUCE]

The Center for Constitutional Rights issued a thorough, 44-page, factual and legal analysis, asserting that “there is a plausible and credible case that Israel is committing genocide against the Palestinian population in Gaza.” Raz Segal, a historian of the Holocaust and genocide studies, calls the situation in Gaza “a textbook case of Genocide unfolding in front of our eyes.” The inaugural chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Luis Moreno Ocampo, notes that “Just the blockade of Gaza—just that—could be genocide under Article 2(c) of the Genocide Convention, meaning they are creating conditions to destroy a group.” A group of over 800 academics and practitioners, including leading scholars in the fields of international law and genocide studies, warn of “a serious risk of genocide being committed in the Gaza Strip.” A group of seven UN Special Rapporteurs has alerted to the “risk of genocide against the Palestinian people” and reiterated that they “remain convinced that the Palestinian people are at grave risk of genocide.” Thirty-six UN experts now call the situation in Gaza “a genocide in the making.” How many other authorities should I cite? How many hyperlinks are enough?

It's great to see this point being driven home when I've just been hearing variations of this in the MSM for the last few weeks.


Zionist apologists like to frame it as naive college students speaking on things they haven't studied well enough, and ignore all the experts who dedicate their lives studying things like this who have been actively calling it what it is. A genocide.

 

[FAH1223]

Hamas is an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood -- a group that predates what we refer to as Israel by 2 decades.

While it is true that Hamas was created during the first intifada, that really doesn't tell the whole story.

MB had been an active player in keeping the region destabilized.

1. The rise of Anwar Sadat
2. The Yom Kippur war
3. Camp David accords
4. Assassination of Sadat due to 3
5. The formation of Hamas

We keep talking about the Israeli response, but just ignoring everything in the lead up.

You probably have a state solution if Sadat wasn't assassinated and shifting power back to those who want nothing short of the Islamization of that entire region.

You probably have a state solution if the Yom Kippur war was about freeing the Palestinians instead of Egypt and Syria trying to reclaim that land for themselves as occupiers.

You likely don't see a Bibi lead coalition government if those events hadn't played out.

But those are the realities and until there's some shake up in leadership across the board this shyt gonna be on rinse and repeat.

While the Muslim Brotherhood is a force, the Egyptian state has been a military dictatorship since 1952.

Hamas is the Palestinian MB and was founded and supported and even run by Shin Bet in the early days, to undermine Palestinian nationalism.

The same way the Muslim Brotherhood was cultivated by the British to undermine Arab nationalism during the Egyptian monarchy.

The 1973 Yom Kippur War wasn't about the Palestinians. Remember, Israel occupied both the Golan Heights and the entire Sinai after the Six Day War of 1967.

The October war happened because Sadat wanted negotiations and the Israelis would not listen to him and ignored him. Golda Meir didn't want to go to 1967 borders and wanted to keep some parts of Sinai.

The U.S. also disregarded Sadat, citing intelligence reports that forecasted Egypt's re-armament wouldn't be complete until 1977-78, deeming Egypt unprepared for war. Sadat conceived the notion of a limited war to compel Israel into acknowledging him and initiating peace talks, which initially succeeded until he deviated from the plan.

The objectives were limited cross to the other side of the Suez and hold it against all assaults. The Syrians were brought in to bring a distraction to Israel, and Sadat lied to the Syrians, telling them that he was launching a total war. While the Egyptian plan executed flawlessly, external pressures from Saudi Arabia, providing support, and Soviet pressures when Syria faced adversity, coerced them into an offensive stance. Subsequently, the Egyptian forces faced a setback from the Israeli Air Force outside their SAM umbrella.

 

[FAH1223]

These groups felt they had just due to that land before Zionism ever materialized.

Gaza and the west bank weren't free prior to Israel's existence.

I think both the above statements are factually correct.

Obviously Israel has taken on the role of oppressor in the current iteration, but it just comes off as bad faith to pretend everything was fine before.

palestinians were not free under direct british rule but we are not dealing with that right now so i dont know what im supposed say about that.

brits colonize an area but various peoples more or less stay on land they have had for generations.
zionists later come in large numbers and are distributed occupied land by brit colonizers
locals resist being dispossessed of land they lived on for generations
locals lose spectacularly
surrounding nations lose spectacularly
various resistance groups materialize in this state of dispossession and isolation; some secular and even leftist
secular resistance proves to be ineffective at defeating western hegemony/zionism
religious resistance proves to be nihilistic overdetermined preferred opposition
zionism proves to be a long term colonizing project that does not intend to seriously compromise

Prior to Black September, Jordan consistently pursued the acquisition of Palestinian territory to its west, displaying a distinct lack of concern for the establishment of an independent state for Palestinians—a stance at odds with the broader sentiments in the region. Actively supporting the Peel Commission, Jordan's Hashemite leaders engaged in regular dialogue with Zionist counterparts before the 1948 war, presenting various proposals that notably did not outright oppose the idea of a Jewish state. Their acquiescence was contingent on the subsequent annexation of Arab territories. Initially, they accepted the 1948 borders but later reversed this decision under pressure from other Arab states.

The Jordanian involvement in the 1948 war was initially motivated by a desire, at the very least, to control Palestinian territories. However, recognizing an opportunity to seize the entire land, they successfully exploited it, annexing the West Bank for a two-decade period. During this time, Palestinians were treated as Jordanians, issued Jordanian passports and residency. This strategic move, however, was aimed at eradicating political Palestinian nationalism, perceived as a threat to Jordan's security.

Meanwhile in Gaza during the 1960s, Egypt dissolved the puppet All-Palestine government. Nasser's motivation behind this move was to consolidate Arab unity under his leadership.

 

[wire28]

First group of hostages will include 13 women and children

 

[Pressure]

@NZA @Liu Kang @FAH1223 i enjoyed the discussion. Learned some as well. Thanks

 

[FAH1223]

Only democracy in the region?

 

[Ethnic Vagina Finder]

I can’t even enjoy thanksgiving

 

[Pressure]

I can’t even enjoy thanksgiving

You. Can practice some self restraint and enjoy time with your family