• شاهد على إبادة@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          27 days ago

          People in the Middle East aren’t generic and interchangeable. Jews from India or Iraq or Yemen or Ethiopia or Iran or Morocco or Tunisia are still foreign invaders and not indigenous to Palestine. Netanyahu is still European as are the majority of political leaders and every prime minister Israel had so far. The culture that dominated and still dominates Israel’s political and social life is a European culture that is foreign to Palestine and the region.

        • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          27 days ago

          Okay and? I’m from Egypt and I wouldn’t call myself a native of Iraq. Note that Middle Eastern Jews, having been expelled by the locals, were very much justified in going anywhere that would take them, but that’s neither here nor there.

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      28 days ago

      Honestly Hamas is what struck the match for Israel to start killing. Mass killings are not ok but Hamas isn’t the good guy here. If they had more military strength there would be a lot more dead Israelis.

      • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        28 days ago

        Honestly Hamas is what struck the match for Israel to start killing.

        May I interest you in literally all of Palestinian history? What did you want them to do? Sit on their asses as they’re starved and the West bank is ethnically cleansed by the Nazis?

          • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            27 days ago

            For the first three: Why the hell did they have to give up their land to people who explicitly wanted to create an apartheid state?

            For the rest: Pick any one of those and I’ll explain in detail why it was another farce. You’ll also have to explain what 1967 peace deal there was for Palestinians to accept.

            • bestboyfriendintheworld@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              27 days ago

              Under UN partition plan nobody would have needed to move. Everybody would stay where they live already. Jewish immigration would only go to one of the states. It was always planned with a minority of Jews in the Arab state and a minority of Arabs in the Jewish state. So no giving up land that was privately owned. All land acquired by Zionists until 1948 was legally purchased.

              Why? To avoid war.

              Between 1948 and 1967 Palestinians could have accepted Israel’s existence and declared a Palestinian state in the non occupied West Bank and Gaza.

              • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                27 days ago

                Everybody would stay where they live already. Jewish immigration would only go to one of the states. It was always planned with a minority of Jews in the Arab state and a minority of Arabs in the Jewish state. So no giving up land that was privately owned. All land acquired by Zionists until 1948 was legally purchased.

                Are you aware of what Zionists did in the Nakba? Are you aware of why they committed the Nakba? Zionists wanted a Jewish state with an overwhelmingly Jewish majority so they could maintain the facade of a Jewish democratic state. Ethnic cleansing was simply the solution to that “problem”. There’s no world in which Palestinians would be allowed to etay peacefully in their land because they’d never vote for Zionists. Also look at the shit they did after they won the war and the shit they keep doing now. Are these the actions of people that were ever going to respect private land ownership?

                We must expel Arabs and take their place.

                -Ben Gurion, 1937.

                Zionists could’ve accepted the Palestinian proposal of a mutli-ethnic democracy spanning all of Palestine, which in theory should’ve posed no issue, but they didn’t because it wouldn’t be a Jewish-dominated apartheid state.

                Between 1948 and 1967 Palestinians could have accepted Israel’s existence and declared a Palestinian state in the non occupied West Bank and Gaza.

                They were occupied—by neighboring Arab states. And either way that’s not a peace deal. Did you have something concrete in mind or were you just lying?

                • bestboyfriendintheworld@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  27 days ago

                  20% of Israeli citizens are Arabs today, with full rights.

                  Look up what the Arab leaders said at the time.

                  Zionists could’ve accepted the Palestinian proposal of a mutli-ethnic democracy spanning all of Palestine

                  What offer are you talking about?