4 ms·

The Stern gang, who killed him, became the IDF (along with the Haganah and the Irgun). These groups performed the ethnic cleansing of Palestine that allowed Isr

The Stern gang, who killed him, became the IDF (along with the Haganah and the Irgun). These groups performed the ethnic cleansing of Palestine that allowed Israel to be built on Palestinian land (commonly known as the Nakba). > One of the chief organisers of the assassination was Yitzhak Shamir, who became Israel’s prime minister in 1984. Exactly.

antonymoose 1y ago
This is the part that I never understood about US-Israeli relations, that they were going on doing terrible deeds from the beginning. How exactly did they go from these constant attacks including on a close ally like the British to “Greatest Ally” status.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- FridayoLeary 1y ago
  The UK is also historically a strong ally of Israel. Like other former colonies they looked to britain for help and guidance. After all the whole state was built on British foundations. After a while britain realised it was in their interests to help Israel and their relationship even today is one of mutual respect. I think it goes to show the limits of the conflict between the British and the jews of palestine. It was never personal and therefore while there was much anger and resentment, there was never any hate. The history of how the alliance came about is fascinating. It started with the suez war. Their relationship with the US came about at the same time as the breakdown with the French and was helped by the fact that the US saw Israel as a convenient proxy against the Soviets.
  - kalberg6429 1y ago
    That is one of the most grotesque whitewashes of Zionist terrorism I have ever read. You are trying to rewrite a story of Zionist terrorism and colonial succession into a heartwarming family drama. The idea that Zionists were just a colony "looking to Britain for guidance" is an understatement. They were a de facto rival colonial project that used terror to expel the British, the Zionists even ironically described the British as occupiers of Palestine.[0] The Zionists weren't looking for "guidance," they were busy planting bombs[1]. Your claim that it was "never personal" and there was "no hate" is a disgusting lie. Tell that to the families of the British sergeants the Irgun hanged and booby-trapped. Tell that to the scores of British officials murdered in the King David Hotel bombing. It was a vicious Zionist terror campaign, and pretending otherwise is obscene. Finally, your "convenient proxy" explanation sanitizes the ugly truth. The West didn't ally with Israel despite its history of terrorism, but they allied with it because of it. Israel's violent founding proved it could be a ruthless and effective enforcer for Western imperial interests. That is the real foundation of your "special relationship." [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_David_Hotel_bombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_David_Hotel_bombing [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20231029055310/ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/jewish-zionist-terrorism-and-establishment-israel https://web.archive.org/web/20231029055310/ojp.gov/ncjrs/vir...
breppp 1y ago
The Irgun was forcibly integrated into the IDF, claiming dead and almost triggering a civil war. Something the Palestinians could never muster, and one of the reasons they are still in this position, stateless under the control of Hamas
- jedimind 1y ago
  The claim that "The Irgun was forcibly integrated into the IDF" is a classic piece of Zionist propaganda because it uses a technically true event, the Altalena Affair, to paint a profoundly false picture. It's a self-serving myth designed to launder the history of the Irgun and create a clean break between the "respectable" new "state" of Israel and its terrorist antecedents, a break that never truly happened. The Altalena incident was not a moral battle against terrorism, it was a cynical power struggle. Ben-Gurion needed to establish the state's monopoly on force and could not tolerate Menachem Begin's private terrorist gang. After the confrontation, Irgun fighters were not punished. They were absorbed into the IDF, where their terrorist skills became state assets. This move whitewashes what the Irgun actually was. Long before "Israel" absorbed them, they were internationally recognized as terrorists (even by the US AND UK!) for terrorism e.g. like the King-David Hotel bombing. In a famous letter, Albert Einstein and Hannah Arendt called Begin's organization terrorists and "closely akin in its organization, methods, [and] political philosophy to the Nazi and Fascist parties." The ultimate proof that Israel never rejected its terrorist ideology is the career of the Irgun commander himself, Menachem Begin. He was never tried as a traitor or a terrorist. He founded the party that would become Likud and was later elected Prime Minister. Israel didn't purge its terrorist founders, it eventually put one in charge of Israel.
  - breppp 1y ago
    The fact is that the extreme organizations in Israel were the absolute minority and when push came to shove, they were subdued and integrated. Hence the state has successfully enforced its monopoly on violence. When the same thing could have happened in the 1990s with the Palestinians, the exact opposite result happened. A huge mistake from the Palestinian side which left them way worse off (and only getting worse)

antonymoose 1y ago

This is the part that I never understood about US-Israeli relations, that they were going on doing terrible deeds from the beginning. How exactly did they go from these constant attacks including on a close ally like the British to “Greatest Ally” status.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
FridayoLeary 1y ago
The UK is also historically a strong ally of Israel. Like other former colonies they looked to britain for help and guidance. After all the whole state was built on British foundations. After a while britain realised it was in their interests to help Israel and their relationship even today is one of mutual respect. I think it goes to show the limits of the conflict between the British and the jews of palestine. It was never personal and therefore while there was much anger and resentment, there was never any hate. The history of how the alliance came about is fascinating. It started with the suez war. Their relationship with the US came about at the same time as the breakdown with the French and was helped by the fact that the US saw Israel as a convenient proxy against the Soviets.
- kalberg6429 1y ago
  That is one of the most grotesque whitewashes of Zionist terrorism I have ever read. You are trying to rewrite a story of Zionist terrorism and colonial succession into a heartwarming family drama. The idea that Zionists were just a colony "looking to Britain for guidance" is an understatement. They were a de facto rival colonial project that used terror to expel the British, the Zionists even ironically described the British as occupiers of Palestine.[0] The Zionists weren't looking for "guidance," they were busy planting bombs[1]. Your claim that it was "never personal" and there was "no hate" is a disgusting lie. Tell that to the families of the British sergeants the Irgun hanged and booby-trapped. Tell that to the scores of British officials murdered in the King David Hotel bombing. It was a vicious Zionist terror campaign, and pretending otherwise is obscene. Finally, your "convenient proxy" explanation sanitizes the ugly truth. The West didn't ally with Israel despite its history of terrorism, but they allied with it because of it. Israel's violent founding proved it could be a ruthless and effective enforcer for Western imperial interests. That is the real foundation of your "special relationship." [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_David_Hotel_bombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_David_Hotel_bombing [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20231029055310/ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/jewish-zionist-terrorism-and-establishment-israel https://web.archive.org/web/20231029055310/ojp.gov/ncjrs/vir...

breppp 1y ago

The Irgun was forcibly integrated into the IDF, claiming dead and almost triggering a civil war. Something the Palestinians could never muster, and one of the reasons they are still in this position, stateless under the control of Hamas

jedimind 1y ago
The claim that "The Irgun was forcibly integrated into the IDF" is a classic piece of Zionist propaganda because it uses a technically true event, the Altalena Affair, to paint a profoundly false picture. It's a self-serving myth designed to launder the history of the Irgun and create a clean break between the "respectable" new "state" of Israel and its terrorist antecedents, a break that never truly happened. The Altalena incident was not a moral battle against terrorism, it was a cynical power struggle. Ben-Gurion needed to establish the state's monopoly on force and could not tolerate Menachem Begin's private terrorist gang. After the confrontation, Irgun fighters were not punished. They were absorbed into the IDF, where their terrorist skills became state assets. This move whitewashes what the Irgun actually was. Long before "Israel" absorbed them, they were internationally recognized as terrorists (even by the US AND UK!) for terrorism e.g. like the King-David Hotel bombing. In a famous letter, Albert Einstein and Hannah Arendt called Begin's organization terrorists and "closely akin in its organization, methods, [and] political philosophy to the Nazi and Fascist parties." The ultimate proof that Israel never rejected its terrorist ideology is the career of the Irgun commander himself, Menachem Begin. He was never tried as a traitor or a terrorist. He founded the party that would become Likud and was later elected Prime Minister. Israel didn't purge its terrorist founders, it eventually put one in charge of Israel.
- breppp 1y ago
  The fact is that the extreme organizations in Israel were the absolute minority and when push came to shove, they were subdued and integrated. Hence the state has successfully enforced its monopoly on violence. When the same thing could have happened in the 1990s with the Palestinians, the exact opposite result happened. A huge mistake from the Palestinian side which left them way worse off (and only getting worse)