3 ms·

For clarification, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a more narrow view of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Exiled Palestinians were unwelcome to neighboring Arab s

For clarification, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a more narrow view of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Exiled Palestinians were unwelcome to neighboring Arab states. I think you should read the book because your assumption is incorrect about its content. This is cheeky of me, but... A hint for starters: the Zionists did invade Palestine with the intent to destroy it. The Zionist movement in Israel did not respect the partitioning of Palestine set up by UN Resolution 181. Zionists committed mass murder against the Palestinians even outside of typical warfare — there were significant civilian casualties. There is no need to equivocate the criticism that "what Zionists are doing to Palestinians is similar to what Nazis did to Jews" to a very different claim that "the Holocaust and the Nakba are wholly the same." We are horrified that Israel would commit ethnic cleansing against another group of people. It is especially horrific given they did so immediately after having been dealt the same atrocity at the hand of Nazis. You can narrowly criticize Israel for these historical and present-day actions, and you gain credibility by standing firmly on that point. Because my response seems to have gained some traction, I will offer you a couple more sources. I don't require or expect you to purchase and read the aforementioned book, but I hope you will look over the following: [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Palestinian_exodus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Palestinian_exodus [2] https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2017/5/23/the-nakba-did-not-start-or-end-in-1948 https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2017/5/23/the-nakba-did-n...

luckylion 6y ago
> There is no need to equivocate the criticism that "what Zionists are doing to Palestinians is similar to what Nazis did to Jews" to a very different claim that "the Holocaust and the Nakba are wholly the same." I think they are in the same area of related-to-reality-ness. Are civil wars usually bloody and terrible? Yes. Is it reasonable to compare that to the holocaust? No. > We are horrified that Israel would commit ethnic cleansing against another group of people. It is especially horrific given they did so immediately after having been dealt the same atrocity at the hand of Nazis. Is it? It's not to me. Quite the contrary: having just barely survived the murderous intentions of somebody who was aftery our life will probably have you very vigilant and possibly overly defensive against the murderous intentions of another group that's after your life. > You can narrowly criticize Israel for these historical and present-day actions, and you gain credibility by standing firmly on that point. You can totally criticize Israel for the treatment of the Arabs. Yet when you fail to criticize others for similar treatment of other Arabs (or the same Arabs, even, in the case of Fatah and Hamas), it suggests that your issue with Israels treatment isn't a question of ethics, but of ethnics. That is: had mass-immigration to Palestine from Turkey happened, and had these Turks declared a new state and everything else had happened exactly the same way, you wouldn't criticize them, because they aren't Jews. And if you would: why would you limit your criticism to Israel, and not apply it to all offenders? "Oh, but you must start with one", sure, sure, but why start with the smallest one that offends much less than others and focus on decades ago instead of today? And why join ranks with terrible governments in doing so, who mock the very idea of human rights? That just doesn't make sense to me in a way of "I'm really equally against all bad things, I've just chosen to be vocal about this particular one for no specific reason whatsoever".
- aesh2Xa1 6y ago
  I said above, "And you needn't publicly enumerate your disgust for all atrocities by all peoples in order to denounce the single action of a single people." I'm happy to criticize each other group's wrongdoings; I needn't do so in a single breath. I object to the conflation of anti-zionism with anti-semitism. On a second order, I care about Zionists' crime carrying out ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in Palestine. It is an ugly perspective, to me, that we should concern ourselves with the Zionists' ethnic cleansing of Palestinians only after we have solved all other problems. Anyway, check out the three sources. I think you have an interest in the matter.
  - luckylion 6y ago
    > I'm happy to criticize each other group's wrongdoings; I needn't do so in a single breath. You'll be the one-in-a-million exception then, in my experience. Most declare that they would, but never will, given the chance. > It is an ugly perspective, to me, that we should concern ourselves with the Zionists' ethnic cleansing of Palestinians only after we have solved all other problems. Meh, I don't even think ethnic cleansing actually applies (not least because Palestinians aren't an ethnic group, they're a cultural group). But even more so: that's not what I said. What I'm saying is that there's a suspicious focus on Israel that turns into willful ignorance and self-imposed blindness when it comes to other things. That heavily suggests it's not actually about what Israel does, but rather about the fact that it's Israel doing it.

luckylion 6y ago

> There is no need to equivocate the criticism that "what Zionists are doing to Palestinians is similar to what Nazis did to Jews" to a very different claim that "the Holocaust and the Nakba are wholly the same." I think they are in the same area of related-to-reality-ness. Are civil wars usually bloody and terrible? Yes. Is it reasonable to compare that to the holocaust? No. > We are horrified that Israel would commit ethnic cleansing against another group of people. It is especially horrific given they did so immediately after having been dealt the same atrocity at the hand of Nazis. Is it? It's not to me. Quite the contrary: having just barely survived the murderous intentions of somebody who was aftery our life will probably have you very vigilant and possibly overly defensive against the murderous intentions of another group that's after your life. > You can narrowly criticize Israel for these historical and present-day actions, and you gain credibility by standing firmly on that point. You can totally criticize Israel for the treatment of the Arabs. Yet when you fail to criticize others for similar treatment of other Arabs (or the same Arabs, even, in the case of Fatah and Hamas), it suggests that your issue with Israels treatment isn't a question of ethics, but of ethnics. That is: had mass-immigration to Palestine from Turkey happened, and had these Turks declared a new state and everything else had happened exactly the same way, you wouldn't criticize them, because they aren't Jews. And if you would: why would you limit your criticism to Israel, and not apply it to all offenders? "Oh, but you must start with one", sure, sure, but why start with the smallest one that offends much less than others and focus on decades ago instead of today? And why join ranks with terrible governments in doing so, who mock the very idea of human rights? That just doesn't make sense to me in a way of "I'm really equally against all bad things, I've just chosen to be vocal about this particular one for no specific reason whatsoever".

aesh2Xa1 6y ago
I said above, "And you needn't publicly enumerate your disgust for all atrocities by all peoples in order to denounce the single action of a single people." I'm happy to criticize each other group's wrongdoings; I needn't do so in a single breath. I object to the conflation of anti-zionism with anti-semitism. On a second order, I care about Zionists' crime carrying out ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in Palestine. It is an ugly perspective, to me, that we should concern ourselves with the Zionists' ethnic cleansing of Palestinians only after we have solved all other problems. Anyway, check out the three sources. I think you have an interest in the matter.
- luckylion 6y ago
  > I'm happy to criticize each other group's wrongdoings; I needn't do so in a single breath. You'll be the one-in-a-million exception then, in my experience. Most declare that they would, but never will, given the chance. > It is an ugly perspective, to me, that we should concern ourselves with the Zionists' ethnic cleansing of Palestinians only after we have solved all other problems. Meh, I don't even think ethnic cleansing actually applies (not least because Palestinians aren't an ethnic group, they're a cultural group). But even more so: that's not what I said. What I'm saying is that there's a suspicious focus on Israel that turns into willful ignorance and self-imposed blindness when it comes to other things. That heavily suggests it's not actually about what Israel does, but rather about the fact that it's Israel doing it.