4 ms·

There's simply no comparison between the Afghanistan occupation and what Israel is doing in its occupied territories. Stupid and ultimately futile though the f

There's simply no comparison between the Afghanistan occupation and what Israel is doing in its occupied territories. Stupid and ultimately futile though the former mission was, the allied countries never thought they had a historical claim (or even any specific interest) in Afghanistan the way Israel covets (and certain factions within it openly proclaim their intent to fully displace the native population from) the West Bank and Gaza. We save that rhetoric [accusations of genocide] only for Israel. Plainly false, given the plethora of genocide rampages in recent decades. And the extremely prominent media coverage of these situations, which cannot possibly have escaped your notice.

weatherlite 2y ago
> Stupid and ultimately futile though the former mission was, the allied countries never thought they had a historical claim (or even any specific interest) in Afghanistan the way Israel covets (and certain factions within it openly proclaim their intent to fully displace the native population from) the West Bank and Gaza. There's no much talk of historical claims on Gaza from Israelis besides very fringe groups who don't number a lot of people. Palestinians on the other hand are pretty much 100% united in their view that history necessitates they "free Palestine from the river to the sea", so if there are major historical claims they mostly come from the Palestinian side and their fans in the West and the Muslim world. > Plainly false, given the plethora of genocide rampages in recent decades. > And the extremely prominent media coverage of these situations, which cannot possibly have escaped your notice. No not really, there was nothing resembling the circus around Israel not even close. Which ones do you mean were vastly talked about or protested against even with 1/100 the amount this does?
- aguaviva 2y ago
  There's no much talk of historical claims on Gaza from Israelis besides very fringe groups who don't number a lot of people. They're certainly quite obnoxious, these groups. But they can't be called "fringe" anymore, now that they've been made coalition partners in the 37th government (receiving very prominent cabinet positions to boot). Meanwhile Israel's expansionist claims on the West Bank have been the de-facto national consensus (and have been supported by every government to one degree or another) since the late 70s. If there are major historical claims they mostly come from the Palestinian side These aren't "claims" coming from their side as it has always been their land to begin with.
  - weatherlite 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - dunekid 2y ago
      What is the complication in West Bank? It is under occupation by all means. And also under apartheid. Occupying West Bank completely might also be just fringe ideas, that are not worth paying attention to? Is it the complication of Smotrich price-tagging Palestinians by creating as many illegal occupations as the number of countries recognising the Palestinian people's lives?
      - weatherlite 2y ago
        By saying its more complicated I meant to say that the settlements in the West Bank don't really have mainstream support in Israel as the parent comment suggested. There's a very powerful national religious minority that is able to keep them alive but that's more due to political deadlock than due to widespread support (I'm not arguing some support exists but its not huge, and Smotrich btw is expected not to make it into the next parliament because he's leaking tons of voters). Curiously, the most religious Israelis (the ultra orthodox) generally don't care about the settlements at all. Now dismantling the settlements would be very hard now but that's much more due to a reluctance of most Israelis to see a Palestinian state in the West Bank due to fear for their security - not out of love for the settlements. If conditions for peace ever arrive I don't think the majority of Israelis would have a problem to dismantle them (Israel already did dismantle quite a few settlements in the past, also in the West Bank). But yeah we'll cross the 'peace bridge' when we get there.
        aguaviva 2y ago
        By saying its more complicated I meant to say that the settlements in the West Bank don't really have mainstream support in Israel as the parent comment suggested. No "mainstream support"? It's run as an administrative area of the State of Israel, "administered by the Israel Defense Forces Central Command, and military law is applied": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judea_and_Samaria_Area https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judea_and_Samaria_Area

weatherlite 2y ago

> Stupid and ultimately futile though the former mission was, the allied countries never thought they had a historical claim (or even any specific interest) in Afghanistan the way Israel covets (and certain factions within it openly proclaim their intent to fully displace the native population from) the West Bank and Gaza. There's no much talk of historical claims on Gaza from Israelis besides very fringe groups who don't number a lot of people. Palestinians on the other hand are pretty much 100% united in their view that history necessitates they "free Palestine from the river to the sea", so if there are major historical claims they mostly come from the Palestinian side and their fans in the West and the Muslim world. > Plainly false, given the plethora of genocide rampages in recent decades. > And the extremely prominent media coverage of these situations, which cannot possibly have escaped your notice. No not really, there was nothing resembling the circus around Israel not even close. Which ones do you mean were vastly talked about or protested against even with 1/100 the amount this does?

aguaviva 2y ago
There's no much talk of historical claims on Gaza from Israelis besides very fringe groups who don't number a lot of people. They're certainly quite obnoxious, these groups. But they can't be called "fringe" anymore, now that they've been made coalition partners in the 37th government (receiving very prominent cabinet positions to boot). Meanwhile Israel's expansionist claims on the West Bank have been the de-facto national consensus (and have been supported by every government to one degree or another) since the late 70s. If there are major historical claims they mostly come from the Palestinian side These aren't "claims" coming from their side as it has always been their land to begin with.
- weatherlite 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - dunekid 2y ago
    What is the complication in West Bank? It is under occupation by all means. And also under apartheid. Occupying West Bank completely might also be just fringe ideas, that are not worth paying attention to? Is it the complication of Smotrich price-tagging Palestinians by creating as many illegal occupations as the number of countries recognising the Palestinian people's lives?
    - weatherlite 2y ago
      By saying its more complicated I meant to say that the settlements in the West Bank don't really have mainstream support in Israel as the parent comment suggested. There's a very powerful national religious minority that is able to keep them alive but that's more due to political deadlock than due to widespread support (I'm not arguing some support exists but its not huge, and Smotrich btw is expected not to make it into the next parliament because he's leaking tons of voters). Curiously, the most religious Israelis (the ultra orthodox) generally don't care about the settlements at all. Now dismantling the settlements would be very hard now but that's much more due to a reluctance of most Israelis to see a Palestinian state in the West Bank due to fear for their security - not out of love for the settlements. If conditions for peace ever arrive I don't think the majority of Israelis would have a problem to dismantle them (Israel already did dismantle quite a few settlements in the past, also in the West Bank). But yeah we'll cross the 'peace bridge' when we get there.
      - aguaviva 2y ago
        By saying its more complicated I meant to say that the settlements in the West Bank don't really have mainstream support in Israel as the parent comment suggested. No "mainstream support"? It's run as an administrative area of the State of Israel, "administered by the Israel Defense Forces Central Command, and military law is applied": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judea_and_Samaria_Area https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judea_and_Samaria_Area