4 ms·

How many of those civilians were ex-military (all?), how many were settlers in stolen land? If you knowingly occupy someones stolen land you are not that innoce

by k99x55 3y ago

How many of those civilians were ex-military (all?), how many were settlers in stolen land? If you knowingly occupy someones stolen land you are not that innocent are you? And, Israel does not have the right to defend itself. Israel is the settler aggressor. The biggest terrorist is Israel. Israel is a settler colonial racist Apartheid regime.

nailer 3y ago
> how many were settlers in stolen land? Zero. Jews were in Israel under: Babylonians, Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, Arabs, Crusaders, Ottomans and the British. Look at the Al Aqsa mosque. See the giant thing underneath it? Before 1948, they purchased land from Ottomans. After 1948 Arab states kept declaring war on Israel and losing, making Israel larger.
- activescott 3y ago
  This is a bit more complicated. Jews were in Palestine before 1948 and lived alongside Arabs in peace throughout the Ottoman Empire. They often fled persecution in Europe to the Ottoman Empire: https://en.wikipedia.orgt/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_the_Ottoman_Empire https://en.wikipedia.orgt/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_the_Ot... The historical timeline of Palestine leading up to and since 1948 is https://www.un.org/unispal/historical-timeline/ https://www.un.org/unispal/historical-timeline/ The timeline is good overall, but the four-minute video there is a good summary. A direct link to the video is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBjMbe24Vu0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBjMbe24Vu0.
  - nailer 3y ago
    > lived alongside Arabs in peace throughout the Ottoman Empire No. Multiple violent confrontations. You can find ample sources for this. Partition into jewish and Arab states was to avoid bloodshed. > The historical timeline of Palestine leading up to and since 1948 This is a bizarre document that starts in 1885, at minimum you would start about 136AD with the renaming of Israel to Philestinea by the Romans. But then again, the UN is famously run by various tinpot dictators that raise more resolutions against Israel than themselves.
    - activescott 3y ago
      I have cited sources that include a balanced account of Jews living alongside Arabs in peace throughout the Ottoman Empire for hundreds of years. Neither I or the source I cited indicates there was zero violence. If you read into it, you'll find violence started escalating in the 19th century after nationalism was introduced. Over hundreds of years, is there anywhere where anyone didn't encounter "multiple" violent confrontations? If zero violent confrontations is the standard we're judging by, I don't think any country will meet that standard. I'm not sure why a factual account of history is "bizarre" because it starts in 1885. The "Jews were there first" argument, the idea that we should redrew the world as it was 2000+ years ago (but ignore the subsequent ~1000 years), isn't a new one. I just always wonder why the logic only applies to Palestine, but somehow not the rest of the world.
- nailer 3y ago
  Not complaining about moderation, but it's bizarre that a series of well-accepted historical facts would be moderated to minus three.
hackerlight 3y ago
> how many were settlers > settler colonial Dehumanizing buzzwords. People who were born somewhere are not "settlers". It implies they had some other choice about where to be born. Anyone born somewhere has an equal right to be there as anyone else. Russians "settlers" born in Crimea have every right to live in Crimea even if their grandparents came there due to Stalin's colonial policies against the Tartars. White or Asian "settlers" born in the US have every right to live there even if they are on lands that were originally stolen from the Native Americans. And so on. But we all know what you really mean. It's only the Israeli "settlers" that deserve what they get. The Jews who were kicked out of all the neighboring Arab countries and had their previous houses and lands "settled" in and became refugees in Israel with nowhere else to go can eat dust. The Jews who were living in Palestine/Israel before the creation of Israel, and their children, can also be classified as "settlers". We know what you really mean behind this soup of buzzwords. > And, Israel does not have the right to defend itself. Rhetorical language games. Should all 9 million Israelis be killed because they are "settlers"? If you answer "no", then you disprove your own claim. If you answer "yes", then you discredit yourself more than I could ever have done. I'm far from being unabashedly pro-Israel, you can see my comment history here for yourself. But this buzzword-laden dehumanizing language needs to be called out.
- k99x55 3y ago
  Those settlers do know the history (or should know) and they do know its stolen land. And many did fight in the military defending the Apartheid system. And they know they are not willing to share with native Palestinians. I don't mean Hamas has the right to kill civilians, but what reaction are we to expect? Flowers and gifts? Come on. Yes, Israel does not have the right to defend itself against Palestinians. >Should all 9 million Israelis be killed because they are "settlers" No one said that.
  - hackerlight 3y ago
    It's such an illiberal, dehumanizing and racist perspective that an Israeli that was born in that land is less justified of being there than a Palestinian, just because of something their parents or grandparents did. If only they had different genes.

by k99x55 3y ago

nailer 3y ago

> how many were settlers in stolen land? Zero. Jews were in Israel under: Babylonians, Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, Arabs, Crusaders, Ottomans and the British. Look at the Al Aqsa mosque. See the giant thing underneath it? Before 1948, they purchased land from Ottomans. After 1948 Arab states kept declaring war on Israel and losing, making Israel larger.

activescott 3y ago
This is a bit more complicated. Jews were in Palestine before 1948 and lived alongside Arabs in peace throughout the Ottoman Empire. They often fled persecution in Europe to the Ottoman Empire: https://en.wikipedia.orgt/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_the_Ottoman_Empire https://en.wikipedia.orgt/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_the_Ot... The historical timeline of Palestine leading up to and since 1948 is https://www.un.org/unispal/historical-timeline/ https://www.un.org/unispal/historical-timeline/ The timeline is good overall, but the four-minute video there is a good summary. A direct link to the video is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBjMbe24Vu0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBjMbe24Vu0.
- nailer 3y ago
  > lived alongside Arabs in peace throughout the Ottoman Empire No. Multiple violent confrontations. You can find ample sources for this. Partition into jewish and Arab states was to avoid bloodshed. > The historical timeline of Palestine leading up to and since 1948 This is a bizarre document that starts in 1885, at minimum you would start about 136AD with the renaming of Israel to Philestinea by the Romans. But then again, the UN is famously run by various tinpot dictators that raise more resolutions against Israel than themselves.
  - activescott 3y ago
    I have cited sources that include a balanced account of Jews living alongside Arabs in peace throughout the Ottoman Empire for hundreds of years. Neither I or the source I cited indicates there was zero violence. If you read into it, you'll find violence started escalating in the 19th century after nationalism was introduced. Over hundreds of years, is there anywhere where anyone didn't encounter "multiple" violent confrontations? If zero violent confrontations is the standard we're judging by, I don't think any country will meet that standard. I'm not sure why a factual account of history is "bizarre" because it starts in 1885. The "Jews were there first" argument, the idea that we should redrew the world as it was 2000+ years ago (but ignore the subsequent ~1000 years), isn't a new one. I just always wonder why the logic only applies to Palestine, but somehow not the rest of the world.
nailer 3y ago
Not complaining about moderation, but it's bizarre that a series of well-accepted historical facts would be moderated to minus three.

hackerlight 3y ago

> how many were settlers > settler colonial Dehumanizing buzzwords. People who were born somewhere are not "settlers". It implies they had some other choice about where to be born. Anyone born somewhere has an equal right to be there as anyone else. Russians "settlers" born in Crimea have every right to live in Crimea even if their grandparents came there due to Stalin's colonial policies against the Tartars. White or Asian "settlers" born in the US have every right to live there even if they are on lands that were originally stolen from the Native Americans. And so on. But we all know what you really mean. It's only the Israeli "settlers" that deserve what they get. The Jews who were kicked out of all the neighboring Arab countries and had their previous houses and lands "settled" in and became refugees in Israel with nowhere else to go can eat dust. The Jews who were living in Palestine/Israel before the creation of Israel, and their children, can also be classified as "settlers". We know what you really mean behind this soup of buzzwords. > And, Israel does not have the right to defend itself. Rhetorical language games. Should all 9 million Israelis be killed because they are "settlers"? If you answer "no", then you disprove your own claim. If you answer "yes", then you discredit yourself more than I could ever have done. I'm far from being unabashedly pro-Israel, you can see my comment history here for yourself. But this buzzword-laden dehumanizing language needs to be called out.

k99x55 3y ago
Those settlers do know the history (or should know) and they do know its stolen land. And many did fight in the military defending the Apartheid system. And they know they are not willing to share with native Palestinians. I don't mean Hamas has the right to kill civilians, but what reaction are we to expect? Flowers and gifts? Come on. Yes, Israel does not have the right to defend itself against Palestinians. >Should all 9 million Israelis be killed because they are "settlers" No one said that.
- hackerlight 3y ago
  It's such an illiberal, dehumanizing and racist perspective that an Israeli that was born in that land is less justified of being there than a Palestinian, just because of something their parents or grandparents did. If only they had different genes.