9 ms·

I wouldn't label this as "support for Israel"/"against Israel". One can support Israel without supporting Israel's current approach. Many within Israel are not

by sfink 1y ago

I wouldn't label this as "support for Israel"/"against Israel". One can support Israel without supporting Israel's current approach. Many within Israel are not happy with Netanyahu's methods, and presumably they are not against Israel. I understand that that's the current shorthand, but it seems inaccurate and unnecessarily polarizing to me.

caycep 1y ago
This is what puzzles me - ppl keep railing about being pro or anti Israel and it's overly simplistic and also not really accurately describing things. It's more pro/anti Likud or Kahanists, or really at heart a right vs left wing divide. There's still plenty of Labor or more progressive elements of the Israeli public who are against what Netanyahu and his political allies are doing.
- throwaway3060 1y ago
  [flagged]
- throw310822 1y ago
  Israel was literally born out of political scheming to get assigned a portion of someone else's territory for an exclusive ethno-nationalistic state; then out of ethnically cleansing that territory. It was necessary to the project and planned in advanced. You can be for the existence of a peaceful Israel that has entirely retreated within recognised borders and made amends for its past genocidal behaviour- but it's not what the current Israel is or, sadly, can ever be. > There's still plenty of Labor or more progressive elements of the Israeli public who are against... No. Not at all.
  - klipt 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - throw310822 1y ago
      > Shouldn't similar preconditions of making amends apply to whether or not we accept the existence of those Arab states? And what if they should? Do you think it make Israel's genocide look better now? Stop trying to change the subject or shift the blame, it's a trick and it's pathetic.
      - ukblewis 1y ago
        It is called a rhetorical device. It is considering the ends of your argument. If you are British, French, German, American, Spanish, Portuguese, etc. and you support the argument that displacement or control of a people is bad, I agree, but consider what you would want to do and apply the rule fairly. Criticising one country for “taking” land when it was given that land by the same UN you use to claim that it is a genocidal country today… well that really is rich
        DiogenesKynikos 1y ago
        Was it really the "same" UN? In 1947, most of the world was still colonized, and had no UN representation. France, Britain and the US might not have had much of a problem with telling some people in the Third World to give up their homeland, but sentiment in colonized countries would have been very different. Also recall that it was only a UN recommendation, not a binding resolution.
        throw310822 1y ago
        Yes of course it's a rhetorical device, and it's meant to subtly change the subject to prevent engaging with it. This conversation went like this: >>>> ppl keep railing about being pro or anti Israel and it's overly simplistic and also not really accurately describing things. It's more pro/anti Likud or Kahanists To which I replied that Israel is constitutionally born out of a pre-planned colonisation and ethnic cleansing and it's wrong to think that its supremacist ideology only belongs to a part of its political spectrum- it could change but it's unfortunately unrealistic. >>> Israel was literally born out of political scheming to get assigned a portion of someone else's territory for an exclusive ethno-nationalistic state; then out of ethnically cleansing that territory. It was necessary to the project and planned in advance. To which the GP replied with something that tries to change the subject on Arab states, at the same time introducing a historical falsehood: >> The Arab states haven't made amends for ethnically cleansing huge numbers of Jews Now, 1) the Arab states are not born out of a planned ethnic cleansing of anyone (at least not in the recent past) 2) Many, perhaps most of the Jews that immigrated to Israel did so voluntarily (made Aliyah) 3) By the way, Israel itself even engaged in false flag terrorism to push Jews to emigrate from Arab countries to Israel. And most importantly, the argument has no bearing with the original subject, which is whether its a specific political side that is determining Israel's course now or the country is constitutionally like that. Arab countries have nothing to do with the subject, they belong to a different conversation. Hope it helps.
  - cnlevy 1y ago
    > Israel was literally born out of political scheming Its more of a popular jewish movement that over 100 years changed the ethnic composition of the Palestine region from 1-2% in the 1840s up to 30% in the 1940s. Political scheming is secondary and was born well after the 1840s. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Palestine_(region) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Palesti...
    - throw310822 1y ago
      I was referring to the well documented deals and shenanigans that were instrumental first to get the promise of support for an Israeli homeland, and then in the UN to get the partition plan approved. Zionism itself is a product of 19th century nationalisms and of course of a (widespread at the time) colonial mindset.
      - cnlevy 1y ago
        Do you still think that today its a colonial project ?
        slt2021 1y ago
        [dead]
        pyrale 1y ago
        Does Israel still encourage colonies in the west bank?
        cnlevy 1y ago
        Have Israel and Palestine determined borders ? A ceasefire line is not a border after the ceasefire is broken and the front line moves
        throw310822 1y ago
        Do you really expect you can defend Israel with this kind of lawyering and be taken seriously? "Well akshually a ceasefire line...". For god's sake. Let's not even get into who has violated the supposed ceasefire first, or on the legality of settling your population outside of its line, violated or not (spoiler: illegal in any case). Settlements have been declared illegal many times during the decades, most recently this year by the ICJ, and Israel has known this perfectly well since the start.
  - themaninthedark 1y ago
    And the Arab opposition movement that later became the Palestinian movement has ties to literal Nazis... German and Bosnian WWII veterans, including a handful of former intelligence, Wehrmacht, and Waffen SS officers, were among the volunteers fighting for the Palestinian cause. Veterans of WWII Axis militaries were represented in the ranks of the ALA forces commanded by Fawzi al-Qawuqji (who had been awarded an officer's rank in the Wehrmacht during WWII) and in the Mufti's forces, commanded by Abd al-Qadir (who had fought with the Germans against the British in Iraq) and Salama (who trained in Germany as a commando during WWII and took part in a failed parachute mission into Palestine). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Arabian_Legion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Arabian_Legion Husseini is still regarded by many as 'the George Washington' of the Palestinian people, and if the Palestinians were to get a state of their own, he would be honored in the way our founding father is. In February 1943 the first of three divisions was formed of Bosnian and Albanian Muslims, who wore fezes decorated with SS runes and were led in their prayers by regimental imams notionally under the supervision of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem.(Mohammed Amin al-Husseini from 1921–1937) https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Haj_Amin_al-Husseini https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Haj_Amin_al-Husseini
- somenameforme 1y ago
  It's not a party - it's an ideology: zionism [1], for which there is widespread left and right support. It is almost like a 20th century manifest destiny [2], with largely the same inevitable outcome. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism [2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifest_destiny https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifest_destiny
  - adastra22 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - somenameforme 1y ago
      Like with Manifest Destiny the problem comes when the area you want to decide to call your own already has people living there. I'd also add that there is no sort of human right to having your own homogeneous country. Most countries in the world have large sects of the population that would like to form their own autonomous states, many with populations substantially larger than that which initially carved out Israel for themselves. Unfortunately we live on a planet in which most of all land that's remotely habitable has been claimed by somebody.
      - adastra22 1y ago
        Israel isn't a homogenous country. It is majority jewish, but there are large minorities of Arabs, Druze, levant Christians, etc. These minorities--just under 30% of the population--hold full citizenship and have the same civil rights as any other Israeli. Zionism is a desire to have a majority-jewish state that is strong enough to protect jews from future pogroms. It is not a quest for a homogenous state.
        darick 1y ago
        Yes, and surely these minorities are not treated like second class citizens? What's that? "A 2018 report by the Israeli State Comptroller on the protection of non-Jewish civilians found that 46% of Arab citizens in Israel lack access to adequate shelters, compared to 26% of the general population" In the context of bomb shelters.
- nemothekid 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - ukblewis 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - nemothekid 1y ago
      >Zionists do not support genocide. I never said this in my post. This is a reflexive defense on your part as I never specifically called out Zionists, in general, supported genocide. I said, the vast majority of the Knesset, supports genocide. I will say though, zionists in general are wishfully ignorant of this fact. >This is defamatory BS without any evidence at best Which parts are defamatory? Are you seriously going to argue that the Religious Zionist Party doesn't support genocide? Cmon man, Bezalel Smotrich is wanted by the ICC.[1] [1]https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/11/1157286 https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/11/1157286
      - dlubarov 1y ago
        The ICC charges do not include genocide, so that doesn't support your claim. Khan sought a somewhat related extermination charge, which was rejected by the pre-trial chamber.
- hyperman1 1y ago
  I find this a strange take, and I hear it a lot from inhabitants of both the USA and Israel about their leadership. For better or worse, Netanyahu represents the Israeli governement, which represents Israel. Similar with Trump and the USA, or Putin and Russia. Sorry for the people who don't agree with them, but that's an internal power struggle, and as an outsider it is normal to abstract that away. For all of us: Your country is doing what it does. As a Belgian, I spit on my idiotic, nasty governements. Insert tiny violin, whatever Belgium does on the international forum, I'll still be tarred with it. Similarly, we talk about Germany's role in world war 2, even if only about 10% of them were associated with the NSDAP. Every power struggle is always represented overly simplistic. Sorry for both the jews and Israëli's who don't agree with it, you're probably good people. This time I am lucky to sit at a very comfortable sideline, criticising your country. But the point stands: Israel is correctly described as officially committing a genocide, and hence it can't be described as the good side.
  - dotancohen 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - VerminOctopus1 1y ago
      The evidence of Israel’s genocide is plain to see. Israel is directly responsible for the systematic murder of countless civilians, a disgusting portion of which are children. What you are doing with this comment is attempting to shift the blame and responsibility in a transparent and gross manner. The journalists are not the problem, the people dropping the bombs every day are.
      - dotancohen 1y ago
        [flagged]
    - lupusreal 1y ago
      You are denying the most well documented genocide in human history. Bad look my dude.
thunky 1y ago
> One can support Israel without supporting Israel's current approach. I think you're overthinking this. We're taking about a country committing genocide here. You either support them or you don't.
- dotancohen 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - thunky 1y ago
    It is possible to despise Israel's behavior, and even want their current political standing to change, without being antisemitic or genocidal.
    - dotancohen 1y ago
      [flagged]
      - FireBeyond 1y ago
        [flagged]
        YZF 1y ago
        No- The Israeli (extreme) right used to say "two banks to the river jordan, one is ours and so is the other" (loose translation). This is very different than "from the river to the sea". Also the Israeli right is willing to generally accept muslims/arabs/Palestinians as equal citizens in that ideological dream. But, how about Israel's declaration of independence? Arguably more representative of the consensus. "WE APPEAL - in the very midst of the onslaught launched against us now for months - to the Arab inhabitants of the State of Israel to preserve peace and participate in the upbuilding of the State on the basis of full and equal citizenship and due representation in all its provisional and permanent institutions." https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/israel.asp https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/israel.asp And guess what, those that listened are now part of the one million Israeli Arab citizenry. I think if we see nuance we can acknowledge it. The worldwide campaign against Israel is devoid of nuance. Some western leaders pay lip service to the idea of removing Hamas and that Israeli hostages should be released but in fact they are taking actions that prolong the war and embolden Hamas. Basically the way the world looks at it is "we told Israel to stop and it doesn't" vs. the way it should be looking at is "What would any other country in the world be doing in these circumstances and what are the conditions Israel is looking for to end the violence and how do we get to those conditions.". There is also orchestrated pressure via social media and media like Al Jazeera that pushes narratives that we're seeing in this thread and is not factual. The cries of genocide started before Israel barely fired a shot after it was attacked and what we're reading today is the same talking points that have been flooding social media for the last two years alongside with an unprecedented flood of war imagery we have not seen in any other conflict because the sole purpose of Hamas is to get as many people killed and injured and attack Israel's image. It's been doing that really well. Being critical of Israel's actions is 100% ok. I am very critical. But what we're seeing is public lynching, not criticism. There is nothing Israel can ever do that is right here. There are no suggestions or proposals for Israel to adjust course that make any sense. Calls for a "cease fire" don't and haven't made any sense because cease fire (which we've had) means Hamas remains in control of Gaza, can re-arm and attack Israel again, and keeps the hostages. Typically this is where the discussion goes to the standard talking points of "didn't start Oct 7th", "Gaza was occupied", "UN blah blah blah", and rhetoric which ignores Hamas and the role of Palestinians in getting where are today. We have maybe 5% of the people in these discussions (on both side - I'll admit that) who have any sense of nuance. We have maybe 1% of people who have enough knowledge on the topic/history etc. We have ideology and propaganda being the dominant forces. So this is why this shouldn't be on Hacker News. There are enough other avenues for online "discussion" (which this is not) on the dividing topics of the day.
tehjoker 1y ago
This isn't right, though it can feel like an option when you are looking for a solution that doesn't make you feel bad. Zionism is the idea of colonial occupation. The internal logic will always end in ethnic cleansing. It did in 1948. It's doing it now. American Manifest Destiny had a similar function, and it also resulted in massive genocide for which we have not atoned. Zionism is done. A secular democratic state for all people with the right of return guaranteed for displaced Palestinians along with some kind of reeducation / denazification program for the genocidal citizens of the current state of Israel is the only viable solution. As a Jew, I don't think Arabs should pay for Germany's crimes. I think Germany should pay. They paid a little already. They should pay more, especially now that they are supporting this genocide too.
- HaZeust 1y ago
  Historically, Germany did pay: Billions of DM in the 1950s and tens of billions of euros since, plus ongoing survivor pensions and restitution. But the broader strategy after 1945 paired accountability with reconstruction to reduce civilian suffering and long-term instability, rather than chasing maximal punishment. But we often don't have world powers pay immeasurable or insurmountable amounts due to the game theory that slip-up's between world powers are inevitable, and when they find themselves in a compromising and vulnerable enough position that another nation state can exert enough power on them to "punish" them, those world powers are already decimated enough that the only logical reason for the punishment is retribution/revenge, thereby adding more "hurt" into the world - when that world power's decimation was already its justice.
  - oddly 1y ago
    You just put words to something I felt, but could not entirely find the words for. Also, war does not solve war.
  - bluecalm 1y ago
    Also about 15 million Germans were displaced from their homes. Whole regions with 95% German population were cleansed and given to Poland. I am not making judgement on this (I am Polish, part of my family lived in a German house like that, the, land with all belongings other part lost their home and were moved to a labor camp in Siberia by Russians) just pointing out that Germans did pay. A lot of people were displaced, forcibly moved to other areas, often to labor camps after WWII. Somehow we are able to accept this new order and live in peace. Arabs started multiple war over it, lost all of them, are still waging war today. The road to peace for them is to lay down arms, surrender and accept the resolution made by the winning side - exactly what we all have done after WWII.
isr 1y ago
There's no way of supporting Israel without supporting this current genocide. Literally no way. Because this current genocide is the logical outcome of what Israel is. And was explained as such, in detail, by David Ben Gurion and Golda Mier. Decades ago. Albert Einstein added his name to a famous letter to the NY Times in the late 40's, in which EXACTLY THIS was explained, in plain & uncompromising language, in the very first paragraph. For Israel to exist, it would have to be just like the Nazis. That's LITERALLY what that letter said. The splitting of a non-existing hair argument that you're trying to do is just to avoid admitting that you've been wrong the entire time, and enough people warned (or boasted) about it from the very beginning that you really don't have an excuse for being this wrong.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- doron 1y ago
  The moral position then for those who oppose it, is to allow those who wish to leave Gaza into countries that support the Palestinian people. Ireland and Spain come to mind, Qatar as well could take it thousands, they have the money.
  - Qem 1y ago
    The moral position is to do what South Africa did, end apartheid.
  - GuinansEyebrows 1y ago
    it seems disingenuous to frame it as allowing "those who wish to leave Gaza" without discussing the factors that would make a person "wish to leave."
    - doron 1y ago
      The reasons can be many. But if you believe that a genocide is indeed taking place and leaving Gaza saves lives, it’s a reasonable Path to help is to accept the refugees. Europe accepted millions of Ukrainian refugees to keep them out of harms way, why do they not extend the same helping hand to Palestinians from Gaza? who are, at least according to this UN report, in much worse condition?
noufalibrahim 1y ago
> One can support Israel without supporting Israel's current approach. I suppose you could that in theory but only in theory. In practice, the current situation is not very surprising given the overall trajectory since the inception of the country. It's very disturbing to see the memes that are coming out of the social media of the soldiers and even the general population. Even if the current govt. of the country changes, I wouldn't hold my breath about the new government making reparations or taking any other positive steps.
jjani 1y ago
Honesty, openness and transparency are a hard requirement if one is ever to diffuse polarization. As a result, your euphemizing by "Netanyahu's methods" to convey "UN-affirmed genocide" is polarizing, the opposite of what you claim to stand for.

by sfink 1y ago

caycep 1y ago

This is what puzzles me - ppl keep railing about being pro or anti Israel and it's overly simplistic and also not really accurately describing things. It's more pro/anti Likud or Kahanists, or really at heart a right vs left wing divide. There's still plenty of Labor or more progressive elements of the Israeli public who are against what Netanyahu and his political allies are doing.

throwaway3060 1y ago
[flagged]
throw310822 1y ago
Israel was literally born out of political scheming to get assigned a portion of someone else's territory for an exclusive ethno-nationalistic state; then out of ethnically cleansing that territory. It was necessary to the project and planned in advanced. You can be for the existence of a peaceful Israel that has entirely retreated within recognised borders and made amends for its past genocidal behaviour- but it's not what the current Israel is or, sadly, can ever be. > There's still plenty of Labor or more progressive elements of the Israeli public who are against... No. Not at all.
- klipt 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - throw310822 1y ago
    > Shouldn't similar preconditions of making amends apply to whether or not we accept the existence of those Arab states? And what if they should? Do you think it make Israel's genocide look better now? Stop trying to change the subject or shift the blame, it's a trick and it's pathetic.
    - ukblewis 1y ago
      It is called a rhetorical device. It is considering the ends of your argument. If you are British, French, German, American, Spanish, Portuguese, etc. and you support the argument that displacement or control of a people is bad, I agree, but consider what you would want to do and apply the rule fairly. Criticising one country for “taking” land when it was given that land by the same UN you use to claim that it is a genocidal country today… well that really is rich
      - DiogenesKynikos 1y ago
        Was it really the "same" UN? In 1947, most of the world was still colonized, and had no UN representation. France, Britain and the US might not have had much of a problem with telling some people in the Third World to give up their homeland, but sentiment in colonized countries would have been very different. Also recall that it was only a UN recommendation, not a binding resolution.
      - throw310822 1y ago
        Yes of course it's a rhetorical device, and it's meant to subtly change the subject to prevent engaging with it. This conversation went like this: >>>> ppl keep railing about being pro or anti Israel and it's overly simplistic and also not really accurately describing things. It's more pro/anti Likud or Kahanists To which I replied that Israel is constitutionally born out of a pre-planned colonisation and ethnic cleansing and it's wrong to think that its supremacist ideology only belongs to a part of its political spectrum- it could change but it's unfortunately unrealistic. >>> Israel was literally born out of political scheming to get assigned a portion of someone else's territory for an exclusive ethno-nationalistic state; then out of ethnically cleansing that territory. It was necessary to the project and planned in advance. To which the GP replied with something that tries to change the subject on Arab states, at the same time introducing a historical falsehood: >> The Arab states haven't made amends for ethnically cleansing huge numbers of Jews Now, 1) the Arab states are not born out of a planned ethnic cleansing of anyone (at least not in the recent past) 2) Many, perhaps most of the Jews that immigrated to Israel did so voluntarily (made Aliyah) 3) By the way, Israel itself even engaged in false flag terrorism to push Jews to emigrate from Arab countries to Israel. And most importantly, the argument has no bearing with the original subject, which is whether its a specific political side that is determining Israel's course now or the country is constitutionally like that. Arab countries have nothing to do with the subject, they belong to a different conversation. Hope it helps.
- cnlevy 1y ago
  > Israel was literally born out of political scheming Its more of a popular jewish movement that over 100 years changed the ethnic composition of the Palestine region from 1-2% in the 1840s up to 30% in the 1940s. Political scheming is secondary and was born well after the 1840s. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Palestine_(region) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Palesti...
  - throw310822 1y ago
    I was referring to the well documented deals and shenanigans that were instrumental first to get the promise of support for an Israeli homeland, and then in the UN to get the partition plan approved. Zionism itself is a product of 19th century nationalisms and of course of a (widespread at the time) colonial mindset.
    - cnlevy 1y ago
      Do you still think that today its a colonial project ?
      - slt2021 1y ago
        [dead]
      - pyrale 1y ago
        Does Israel still encourage colonies in the west bank?
        cnlevy 1y ago
        Have Israel and Palestine determined borders ? A ceasefire line is not a border after the ceasefire is broken and the front line moves
        throw310822 1y ago
        Do you really expect you can defend Israel with this kind of lawyering and be taken seriously? "Well akshually a ceasefire line...". For god's sake. Let's not even get into who has violated the supposed ceasefire first, or on the legality of settling your population outside of its line, violated or not (spoiler: illegal in any case). Settlements have been declared illegal many times during the decades, most recently this year by the ICJ, and Israel has known this perfectly well since the start.
- themaninthedark 1y ago
  And the Arab opposition movement that later became the Palestinian movement has ties to literal Nazis... German and Bosnian WWII veterans, including a handful of former intelligence, Wehrmacht, and Waffen SS officers, were among the volunteers fighting for the Palestinian cause. Veterans of WWII Axis militaries were represented in the ranks of the ALA forces commanded by Fawzi al-Qawuqji (who had been awarded an officer's rank in the Wehrmacht during WWII) and in the Mufti's forces, commanded by Abd al-Qadir (who had fought with the Germans against the British in Iraq) and Salama (who trained in Germany as a commando during WWII and took part in a failed parachute mission into Palestine). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Arabian_Legion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Arabian_Legion Husseini is still regarded by many as 'the George Washington' of the Palestinian people, and if the Palestinians were to get a state of their own, he would be honored in the way our founding father is. In February 1943 the first of three divisions was formed of Bosnian and Albanian Muslims, who wore fezes decorated with SS runes and were led in their prayers by regimental imams notionally under the supervision of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem.(Mohammed Amin al-Husseini from 1921–1937) https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Haj_Amin_al-Husseini https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Haj_Amin_al-Husseini
somenameforme 1y ago
It's not a party - it's an ideology: zionism [1], for which there is widespread left and right support. It is almost like a 20th century manifest destiny [2], with largely the same inevitable outcome. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism [2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifest_destiny https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifest_destiny
- adastra22 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - somenameforme 1y ago
    Like with Manifest Destiny the problem comes when the area you want to decide to call your own already has people living there. I'd also add that there is no sort of human right to having your own homogeneous country. Most countries in the world have large sects of the population that would like to form their own autonomous states, many with populations substantially larger than that which initially carved out Israel for themselves. Unfortunately we live on a planet in which most of all land that's remotely habitable has been claimed by somebody.
    - adastra22 1y ago
      Israel isn't a homogenous country. It is majority jewish, but there are large minorities of Arabs, Druze, levant Christians, etc. These minorities--just under 30% of the population--hold full citizenship and have the same civil rights as any other Israeli. Zionism is a desire to have a majority-jewish state that is strong enough to protect jews from future pogroms. It is not a quest for a homogenous state.
      - darick 1y ago
        Yes, and surely these minorities are not treated like second class citizens? What's that? "A 2018 report by the Israeli State Comptroller on the protection of non-Jewish civilians found that 46% of Arab citizens in Israel lack access to adequate shelters, compared to 26% of the general population" In the context of bomb shelters.
nemothekid 1y ago
[flagged]
- ukblewis 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - nemothekid 1y ago
    >Zionists do not support genocide. I never said this in my post. This is a reflexive defense on your part as I never specifically called out Zionists, in general, supported genocide. I said, the vast majority of the Knesset, supports genocide. I will say though, zionists in general are wishfully ignorant of this fact. >This is defamatory BS without any evidence at best Which parts are defamatory? Are you seriously going to argue that the Religious Zionist Party doesn't support genocide? Cmon man, Bezalel Smotrich is wanted by the ICC.[1] [1]https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/11/1157286 https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/11/1157286
    - dlubarov 1y ago
      The ICC charges do not include genocide, so that doesn't support your claim. Khan sought a somewhat related extermination charge, which was rejected by the pre-trial chamber.
hyperman1 1y ago
I find this a strange take, and I hear it a lot from inhabitants of both the USA and Israel about their leadership. For better or worse, Netanyahu represents the Israeli governement, which represents Israel. Similar with Trump and the USA, or Putin and Russia. Sorry for the people who don't agree with them, but that's an internal power struggle, and as an outsider it is normal to abstract that away. For all of us: Your country is doing what it does. As a Belgian, I spit on my idiotic, nasty governements. Insert tiny violin, whatever Belgium does on the international forum, I'll still be tarred with it. Similarly, we talk about Germany's role in world war 2, even if only about 10% of them were associated with the NSDAP. Every power struggle is always represented overly simplistic. Sorry for both the jews and Israëli's who don't agree with it, you're probably good people. This time I am lucky to sit at a very comfortable sideline, criticising your country. But the point stands: Israel is correctly described as officially committing a genocide, and hence it can't be described as the good side.
- dotancohen 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - VerminOctopus1 1y ago
    The evidence of Israel’s genocide is plain to see. Israel is directly responsible for the systematic murder of countless civilians, a disgusting portion of which are children. What you are doing with this comment is attempting to shift the blame and responsibility in a transparent and gross manner. The journalists are not the problem, the people dropping the bombs every day are.
    - dotancohen 1y ago
      [flagged]
  - lupusreal 1y ago
    You are denying the most well documented genocide in human history. Bad look my dude.

thunky 1y ago

> One can support Israel without supporting Israel's current approach. I think you're overthinking this. We're taking about a country committing genocide here. You either support them or you don't.

dotancohen 1y ago
[flagged]
- thunky 1y ago
  It is possible to despise Israel's behavior, and even want their current political standing to change, without being antisemitic or genocidal.
  - dotancohen 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - FireBeyond 1y ago
      [flagged]
      - YZF 1y ago
        No- The Israeli (extreme) right used to say "two banks to the river jordan, one is ours and so is the other" (loose translation). This is very different than "from the river to the sea". Also the Israeli right is willing to generally accept muslims/arabs/Palestinians as equal citizens in that ideological dream. But, how about Israel's declaration of independence? Arguably more representative of the consensus. "WE APPEAL - in the very midst of the onslaught launched against us now for months - to the Arab inhabitants of the State of Israel to preserve peace and participate in the upbuilding of the State on the basis of full and equal citizenship and due representation in all its provisional and permanent institutions." https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/israel.asp https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/israel.asp And guess what, those that listened are now part of the one million Israeli Arab citizenry. I think if we see nuance we can acknowledge it. The worldwide campaign against Israel is devoid of nuance. Some western leaders pay lip service to the idea of removing Hamas and that Israeli hostages should be released but in fact they are taking actions that prolong the war and embolden Hamas. Basically the way the world looks at it is "we told Israel to stop and it doesn't" vs. the way it should be looking at is "What would any other country in the world be doing in these circumstances and what are the conditions Israel is looking for to end the violence and how do we get to those conditions.". There is also orchestrated pressure via social media and media like Al Jazeera that pushes narratives that we're seeing in this thread and is not factual. The cries of genocide started before Israel barely fired a shot after it was attacked and what we're reading today is the same talking points that have been flooding social media for the last two years alongside with an unprecedented flood of war imagery we have not seen in any other conflict because the sole purpose of Hamas is to get as many people killed and injured and attack Israel's image. It's been doing that really well. Being critical of Israel's actions is 100% ok. I am very critical. But what we're seeing is public lynching, not criticism. There is nothing Israel can ever do that is right here. There are no suggestions or proposals for Israel to adjust course that make any sense. Calls for a "cease fire" don't and haven't made any sense because cease fire (which we've had) means Hamas remains in control of Gaza, can re-arm and attack Israel again, and keeps the hostages. Typically this is where the discussion goes to the standard talking points of "didn't start Oct 7th", "Gaza was occupied", "UN blah blah blah", and rhetoric which ignores Hamas and the role of Palestinians in getting where are today. We have maybe 5% of the people in these discussions (on both side - I'll admit that) who have any sense of nuance. We have maybe 1% of people who have enough knowledge on the topic/history etc. We have ideology and propaganda being the dominant forces. So this is why this shouldn't be on Hacker News. There are enough other avenues for online "discussion" (which this is not) on the dividing topics of the day.

tehjoker 1y ago

This isn't right, though it can feel like an option when you are looking for a solution that doesn't make you feel bad. Zionism is the idea of colonial occupation. The internal logic will always end in ethnic cleansing. It did in 1948. It's doing it now. American Manifest Destiny had a similar function, and it also resulted in massive genocide for which we have not atoned. Zionism is done. A secular democratic state for all people with the right of return guaranteed for displaced Palestinians along with some kind of reeducation / denazification program for the genocidal citizens of the current state of Israel is the only viable solution. As a Jew, I don't think Arabs should pay for Germany's crimes. I think Germany should pay. They paid a little already. They should pay more, especially now that they are supporting this genocide too.

HaZeust 1y ago
Historically, Germany did pay: Billions of DM in the 1950s and tens of billions of euros since, plus ongoing survivor pensions and restitution. But the broader strategy after 1945 paired accountability with reconstruction to reduce civilian suffering and long-term instability, rather than chasing maximal punishment. But we often don't have world powers pay immeasurable or insurmountable amounts due to the game theory that slip-up's between world powers are inevitable, and when they find themselves in a compromising and vulnerable enough position that another nation state can exert enough power on them to "punish" them, those world powers are already decimated enough that the only logical reason for the punishment is retribution/revenge, thereby adding more "hurt" into the world - when that world power's decimation was already its justice.
- oddly 1y ago
  You just put words to something I felt, but could not entirely find the words for. Also, war does not solve war.
- bluecalm 1y ago
  Also about 15 million Germans were displaced from their homes. Whole regions with 95% German population were cleansed and given to Poland. I am not making judgement on this (I am Polish, part of my family lived in a German house like that, the, land with all belongings other part lost their home and were moved to a labor camp in Siberia by Russians) just pointing out that Germans did pay. A lot of people were displaced, forcibly moved to other areas, often to labor camps after WWII. Somehow we are able to accept this new order and live in peace. Arabs started multiple war over it, lost all of them, are still waging war today. The road to peace for them is to lay down arms, surrender and accept the resolution made by the winning side - exactly what we all have done after WWII.

isr 1y ago

There's no way of supporting Israel without supporting this current genocide. Literally no way. Because this current genocide is the logical outcome of what Israel is. And was explained as such, in detail, by David Ben Gurion and Golda Mier. Decades ago. Albert Einstein added his name to a famous letter to the NY Times in the late 40's, in which EXACTLY THIS was explained, in plain & uncompromising language, in the very first paragraph. For Israel to exist, it would have to be just like the Nazis. That's LITERALLY what that letter said. The splitting of a non-existing hair argument that you're trying to do is just to avoid admitting that you've been wrong the entire time, and enough people warned (or boasted) about it from the very beginning that you really don't have an excuse for being this wrong.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
doron 1y ago
The moral position then for those who oppose it, is to allow those who wish to leave Gaza into countries that support the Palestinian people. Ireland and Spain come to mind, Qatar as well could take it thousands, they have the money.
- Qem 1y ago
  The moral position is to do what South Africa did, end apartheid.
- GuinansEyebrows 1y ago
  it seems disingenuous to frame it as allowing "those who wish to leave Gaza" without discussing the factors that would make a person "wish to leave."
  - doron 1y ago
    The reasons can be many. But if you believe that a genocide is indeed taking place and leaving Gaza saves lives, it’s a reasonable Path to help is to accept the refugees. Europe accepted millions of Ukrainian refugees to keep them out of harms way, why do they not extend the same helping hand to Palestinians from Gaza? who are, at least according to this UN report, in much worse condition?

noufalibrahim 1y ago

> One can support Israel without supporting Israel's current approach. I suppose you could that in theory but only in theory. In practice, the current situation is not very surprising given the overall trajectory since the inception of the country. It's very disturbing to see the memes that are coming out of the social media of the soldiers and even the general population. Even if the current govt. of the country changes, I wouldn't hold my breath about the new government making reparations or taking any other positive steps.

jjani 1y ago

Honesty, openness and transparency are a hard requirement if one is ever to diffuse polarization. As a result, your euphemizing by "Netanyahu's methods" to convey "UN-affirmed genocide" is polarizing, the opposite of what you claim to stand for.