9 ms·

Could you expand on this, my understanding was that Israel held relatively free and fair elections.

jandrese 2y ago
In some ways that makes it worse. When Hamas abuses the population we can at least say that the majority of people have never had a chance to vote for anyone else. In contrast the Israelis chose Bibi. This is what the majority of the population wants.
- crowcroft 2y ago
  Isn't there some form of governance that chose Hamas as leaders? I might not understand the distinction from how Gaza is governed vs. Israel though. I'm also curious if the motivation for abuses as call it matters. I think there was some significant event that Hamas coordinated that then prompted a response from Israel?
  - lupusreal 2y ago
    There was an election eighteen years ago in 2006; Hamas won a plurality but not a majority. So most Palestinians didn't vote for them then, and since then none have. Most Palestinians alive today weren't old enough, or even alive, to have voted in 2006. So you really can't call Hamas's rule democratic in any meaningful sense.
olliej 2y ago
Yes, just like apartheid SA had free and fair elections. Palestinians have no rights in their homeland, Israel invaded it and every time they take more land they simply claim the original occupants aren’t part of the country their home is/was in.
- edanm 2y ago
  There's a lot to say about Israel, but what you said isn't true. Israel didn't "invade" the land. Jews moved into the land legally, and then the rulers of the land at the time gave it to the UN to recommend what to do with it, given that there were two peoples there. The UN recommended splitting it into two parts, one for each people (the Arabs and the Jews). The Jews agreed to this plan, the Arabs didn't. The Jews then declared independence, and other Arab countries launched a war on Israel, urging the current Arab inhabitants of that land to flee, and return when the land is taken away from the Jews. Some of the original Arab inhabitants fled (there are massive debates on whether they fled because of the urging of the Arab leaders, or out of fear). When Israel won the war, these original inhabitants were unable to return. Other Arab inhabitants of that land stayed, and they and their descendants are now Israeli citizens, that have full rights and can vote just like any other citizen (Arab Israelis make up 20% of Israel). So: > Palestinians have no rights in their homeland, Not true. 20% of Israeli citizens are Palestinians. > Israel invaded [their homeland] No, Israel didn't exist, and the Jews who came to Palestine weren't "invading" anything, they arrived legally for the most part (and many were turned away, even during the Holocaust, and ended up dying).
  - dachworker 2y ago
    The Zionists conspired to take over Palestine since before they even set foot in the middle east. Your historical account is carefully crafted propaganda to make it seem like the Zionists didn't simply bully their way into Palestine, but that is exactly what they did and no amount of biased twisting of facts will ever be able to explain how the Palestinians who are the natives of that land, ended up landless and stateless, whereas the Zionists stemming from foreign European and Middle Eastern countries ended up with a fully recognized state. Your forgot to mention the Zionist terrorism, the Zionist pogroms and massacres, the very biased western diplomats involved in splitting a land that was not theirs, and the fact that neither the Turks nor the Brits had any legitimacy over Palestine. The Palestinians did nothing wrong, but they ended up the victim of a bunch of fanatical ethnonationalists who wanted to build a Jewish state on their land.
  - olliej 2y ago
    > Israel didn't "invade" the land. Jews moved into the land legally, and then the rulers of the land at the time gave it to the UN to recommend what to do with it, given that there were two peoples there. Right, and remember, slave owners didn't kidnap people, slaves were legal property. Moreover, there were not two people living there, there were the people who had been living there for thousands of years, who had been claimed by Britain (though not colonized). Claiming there were "two people" is revisionist BS. > The UN recommended splitting it into two parts, one for each people (the Arabs and the Jews). The Jews agreed to this plan, the Arabs didn't. That is, the government sold half your home to a stranger, they agreed to this, you however unreasonably did not. What an asshole you are. > The Jews then declared independence, and other Arab countries launched a war on Israel, urging the current Arab inhabitants of that land to flee, and return when the land is taken away from the Jews. The jews, who just moved into a country, and seized a pile of land and property from the occupants of that country without the occupants consent "declare independence", starting a war. Civilians flee there home so as to not be killed, these are called normally called refugees, but in this case they are Palestinians which Israel has established are not people. When the fighting ends, the refugees returned to their homes to find that the Israeli government had now given their homes to yet more settlers. Opposing that is a criminal offense. I don't know about you but this sure as shit sounds like their homes were illegally invaded. To back up my assessment: Israel has never stopped doing this, and it has been found to be explicitly illegal every single time it has gone to court. > Arab Israelis make up 20% of Israel Right, except 100% of Israel is Palestine, and the overwhelming proportion of the Palestinian population has been forced into ghettos that are not considered part of Israel and have no voting rights in Israel, despite Israel having near total control of all food, water, medical care, ... You're playing BS semantic games, and by your logic SA could have claimed to not be apartheid by just saying that the black South Africans were part of a "different" country that just happened to significantly overlap .. South Africa. I want to be absolutely clear, these BS arguments about Israel not be a colonial invader are no different from claiming that there was nothing illegal when the US government sold the land of native Americans to colonists, and allowed them to eradicate those inhabitants. I get it, you're pro-Israel, and believe the Palestinians don't have any rights to their own homeland, but pretending that Israel is not an invading colony, and pretending Palestinians have equal rights to Israelis (or lets be honest, Israeli jews - the discrimination against muslims and even arabic jews in Israel is well documented - is objectively false. Just say you don't believe Palestinians are people so didn't have any right to their homeland.
upget_tiding 2y ago
The Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip which Israel has controlled since 1967 are not allowed to vote in these elections.
- bigstrat2003 2y ago
  A country doesn't become a dictatorship simply because not everyone is allowed to vote in elections. The US used to require land ownership to vote, then women weren't able to vote, and even now felons can't vote (at least in some states). None of those things meant that the US was or is a dictatorship. I'm not saying "everything is just fine over in Israel". But the original context was about not trading with dictatorships, which Israel is not.

In some ways that makes it worse. When Hamas abuses the population we can at least say that the majority of people have never had a chance to vote for anyone else. In contrast the Israelis chose Bibi. This is what the majority of the population wants.

crowcroft 2y ago
Isn't there some form of governance that chose Hamas as leaders? I might not understand the distinction from how Gaza is governed vs. Israel though. I'm also curious if the motivation for abuses as call it matters. I think there was some significant event that Hamas coordinated that then prompted a response from Israel?
- lupusreal 2y ago
  There was an election eighteen years ago in 2006; Hamas won a plurality but not a majority. So most Palestinians didn't vote for them then, and since then none have. Most Palestinians alive today weren't old enough, or even alive, to have voted in 2006. So you really can't call Hamas's rule democratic in any meaningful sense.

olliej 2y ago

Yes, just like apartheid SA had free and fair elections. Palestinians have no rights in their homeland, Israel invaded it and every time they take more land they simply claim the original occupants aren’t part of the country their home is/was in.

edanm 2y ago
There's a lot to say about Israel, but what you said isn't true. Israel didn't "invade" the land. Jews moved into the land legally, and then the rulers of the land at the time gave it to the UN to recommend what to do with it, given that there were two peoples there. The UN recommended splitting it into two parts, one for each people (the Arabs and the Jews). The Jews agreed to this plan, the Arabs didn't. The Jews then declared independence, and other Arab countries launched a war on Israel, urging the current Arab inhabitants of that land to flee, and return when the land is taken away from the Jews. Some of the original Arab inhabitants fled (there are massive debates on whether they fled because of the urging of the Arab leaders, or out of fear). When Israel won the war, these original inhabitants were unable to return. Other Arab inhabitants of that land stayed, and they and their descendants are now Israeli citizens, that have full rights and can vote just like any other citizen (Arab Israelis make up 20% of Israel). So: > Palestinians have no rights in their homeland, Not true. 20% of Israeli citizens are Palestinians. > Israel invaded [their homeland] No, Israel didn't exist, and the Jews who came to Palestine weren't "invading" anything, they arrived legally for the most part (and many were turned away, even during the Holocaust, and ended up dying).
- dachworker 2y ago
  The Zionists conspired to take over Palestine since before they even set foot in the middle east. Your historical account is carefully crafted propaganda to make it seem like the Zionists didn't simply bully their way into Palestine, but that is exactly what they did and no amount of biased twisting of facts will ever be able to explain how the Palestinians who are the natives of that land, ended up landless and stateless, whereas the Zionists stemming from foreign European and Middle Eastern countries ended up with a fully recognized state. Your forgot to mention the Zionist terrorism, the Zionist pogroms and massacres, the very biased western diplomats involved in splitting a land that was not theirs, and the fact that neither the Turks nor the Brits had any legitimacy over Palestine. The Palestinians did nothing wrong, but they ended up the victim of a bunch of fanatical ethnonationalists who wanted to build a Jewish state on their land.
- olliej 2y ago
  > Israel didn't "invade" the land. Jews moved into the land legally, and then the rulers of the land at the time gave it to the UN to recommend what to do with it, given that there were two peoples there. Right, and remember, slave owners didn't kidnap people, slaves were legal property. Moreover, there were not two people living there, there were the people who had been living there for thousands of years, who had been claimed by Britain (though not colonized). Claiming there were "two people" is revisionist BS. > The UN recommended splitting it into two parts, one for each people (the Arabs and the Jews). The Jews agreed to this plan, the Arabs didn't. That is, the government sold half your home to a stranger, they agreed to this, you however unreasonably did not. What an asshole you are. > The Jews then declared independence, and other Arab countries launched a war on Israel, urging the current Arab inhabitants of that land to flee, and return when the land is taken away from the Jews. The jews, who just moved into a country, and seized a pile of land and property from the occupants of that country without the occupants consent "declare independence", starting a war. Civilians flee there home so as to not be killed, these are called normally called refugees, but in this case they are Palestinians which Israel has established are not people. When the fighting ends, the refugees returned to their homes to find that the Israeli government had now given their homes to yet more settlers. Opposing that is a criminal offense. I don't know about you but this sure as shit sounds like their homes were illegally invaded. To back up my assessment: Israel has never stopped doing this, and it has been found to be explicitly illegal every single time it has gone to court. > Arab Israelis make up 20% of Israel Right, except 100% of Israel is Palestine, and the overwhelming proportion of the Palestinian population has been forced into ghettos that are not considered part of Israel and have no voting rights in Israel, despite Israel having near total control of all food, water, medical care, ... You're playing BS semantic games, and by your logic SA could have claimed to not be apartheid by just saying that the black South Africans were part of a "different" country that just happened to significantly overlap .. South Africa. I want to be absolutely clear, these BS arguments about Israel not be a colonial invader are no different from claiming that there was nothing illegal when the US government sold the land of native Americans to colonists, and allowed them to eradicate those inhabitants. I get it, you're pro-Israel, and believe the Palestinians don't have any rights to their own homeland, but pretending that Israel is not an invading colony, and pretending Palestinians have equal rights to Israelis (or lets be honest, Israeli jews - the discrimination against muslims and even arabic jews in Israel is well documented - is objectively false. Just say you don't believe Palestinians are people so didn't have any right to their homeland.

upget_tiding 2y ago

The Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip which Israel has controlled since 1967 are not allowed to vote in these elections.

bigstrat2003 2y ago
A country doesn't become a dictatorship simply because not everyone is allowed to vote in elections. The US used to require land ownership to vote, then women weren't able to vote, and even now felons can't vote (at least in some states). None of those things meant that the US was or is a dictatorship. I'm not saying "everything is just fine over in Israel". But the original context was about not trading with dictatorships, which Israel is not.