6 ms·

Reminds me of Tiananmen square in regard to how stubbornly westerners insist that NOTHING happened in Gaza before 7/23

by postsantum 7mo ago

yoavm 7mo ago
The point isn't that nothing happened, it is that nothing _that justifies_ the attack happened.
- Parae 7mo ago
  It was the point. > - Hamas was the first to cast the stone. Saying that it was Hamas who casted the first stone on 7 oct, is basically saying nothing happened before. Which is plain wrong. It's the consequence of decades of oppression, crimes, and unstopping massacre from the colonial occupier.
  - naasking 7mo ago
    If you're going back decades, then Palestinians started started multiple civil wars against Jews before the founding of Israel. It's almost as if the Jews knew they couldn't peacefully coexist with most Palestinians on the same land.
    - tovej 7mo ago
      That is simply wrong. Palestinians were first attacked by the British, supporting the Zionists, in the 1930s. Then, in 1947, during plan Dalet, Israel attacked Palestine and the surrounding Arab states. Before that, of course, they colonized Palestine under the shield of the British empire. An easier way to disarm this argument is: Why did the Zionists come and displace the Palestinians? And who would respond peacefully if you try to displace them?
      - naasking 7mo ago
        [flagged]
        tovej 7mo ago
        That's rich. If "talk of colonization" is propaganda, why did Herzl write about "important experiments in colonization" in Palestine? and why did Jabotinsky say "Zionism is a colonization adventure"? Why did Max Nordau say: "the existing and promising beginnings of a Jewish colonization shall be looked after and maintained till the movement will be possible on a large scale"? Why would the founders of Zionism engage in "ahistorical propaganda" against themselves? Zionism is one of the most brutal examples of colonialism ever, and the founders of Zionism don't disagree. Zionists are equivalent to Nazis in their treatment of the "other" and their belief in a pure ethnostate, the consequences of these beliefs are exactly the same. And young people are finally waking up to this. Shame on you, you zionist pig.
    - Parae 7mo ago
      I never mentioned jews and the point remains : It is untrue to say that Hamas started everything on 7th of oct and it is untrue to say that they were the first. Stop diverting attention from the causes of what happened.
- pcthrowaway 7mo ago
  Nothing justifies the attack on civilians because collective punishment is a war crime and a crime against humanity. The military objectives were entirely justified though (taking out IDF bases, attempting to capture IDF soldiers, and attempting to liberate several-thousand Palestinians being held by Israel) Of the 6000 people from Gaza who entered Israel that day, at most 12% were responsible for one of the 800 civilian casualties in Israel. If you consider that the minority who decided to target civilians were likely responsible for targeting multiple civilians, and that some number (at least 4 who are known) of those deaths resulted from the actions of the IDF, it's entirely possible fewer than 8% of insurgents targeted and killed civilians. All told, fewer civilians were killed proportionately than have been killed in Israel's response. What type of resistance would you have recommended Palestinians engage in prior to October 7? They tried non-violent resistance and were met with lethal force.
- sosomoxie 7mo ago
  Attacking the people who stole your land and murdered your family is justified in my book. I don't think I'm alone, very few people globally support Israel.
  - yoavm 7mo ago
    By the wide definition of of "the people who stole your land" that you're using (meaning, no Hamas person checked who stole what land), almost everyone on earth is someone who stole someone's land. If not now, than in the previous generation. In my case as an Israeli, ~4 generations ago. In your case? I don't know. Either the people your family stole the land from X years ago have the right to attack you, or your family just managed to kill all of them years ago so there's no one to demand the land back.
    - manyaoman 7mo ago
      > By the wide definition of of "the people who stole your land" that you're using (meaning, no Hamas person checked who stole what land), almost everyone on earth is someone who stole someone's land. If not now, than in the previous generation. In my case as an Israeli, ~4 generations ago. Thanks for saying that (not sarcasm, I mean it). Peace can only start when both sides admit they’ve done wrong too.
      - sosomoxie 7mo ago
        Would you say both sides did wrong with the Nazis vs Jews? This is an identical situation (possibly worse since the Zionists actively invaded Palestine to commit genocide).
        manyaoman 7mo ago
        It doesn't even need to involve an actual wrongdoing, even a Holocaust survivor might admit that Jews being a socially separate group in Europe may have contributed to the Nazis scapegoating them (just stating a widely accepted fact, not blaming the victims). A 100% victim mindset is rarely helpful.

Reminds me of Tiananmen square in regard to how stubbornly westerners insist that NOTHING happened in Gaza before 7/23

yoavm 7mo ago

The point isn't that nothing happened, it is that nothing _that justifies_ the attack happened.

Parae 7mo ago
It was the point. > - Hamas was the first to cast the stone. Saying that it was Hamas who casted the first stone on 7 oct, is basically saying nothing happened before. Which is plain wrong. It's the consequence of decades of oppression, crimes, and unstopping massacre from the colonial occupier.
- naasking 7mo ago
  If you're going back decades, then Palestinians started started multiple civil wars against Jews before the founding of Israel. It's almost as if the Jews knew they couldn't peacefully coexist with most Palestinians on the same land.
  - tovej 7mo ago
    That is simply wrong. Palestinians were first attacked by the British, supporting the Zionists, in the 1930s. Then, in 1947, during plan Dalet, Israel attacked Palestine and the surrounding Arab states. Before that, of course, they colonized Palestine under the shield of the British empire. An easier way to disarm this argument is: Why did the Zionists come and displace the Palestinians? And who would respond peacefully if you try to displace them?
    - naasking 7mo ago
      [flagged]
      - tovej 7mo ago
        That's rich. If "talk of colonization" is propaganda, why did Herzl write about "important experiments in colonization" in Palestine? and why did Jabotinsky say "Zionism is a colonization adventure"? Why did Max Nordau say: "the existing and promising beginnings of a Jewish colonization shall be looked after and maintained till the movement will be possible on a large scale"? Why would the founders of Zionism engage in "ahistorical propaganda" against themselves? Zionism is one of the most brutal examples of colonialism ever, and the founders of Zionism don't disagree. Zionists are equivalent to Nazis in their treatment of the "other" and their belief in a pure ethnostate, the consequences of these beliefs are exactly the same. And young people are finally waking up to this. Shame on you, you zionist pig.
  - Parae 7mo ago
    I never mentioned jews and the point remains : It is untrue to say that Hamas started everything on 7th of oct and it is untrue to say that they were the first. Stop diverting attention from the causes of what happened.
pcthrowaway 7mo ago
Nothing justifies the attack on civilians because collective punishment is a war crime and a crime against humanity. The military objectives were entirely justified though (taking out IDF bases, attempting to capture IDF soldiers, and attempting to liberate several-thousand Palestinians being held by Israel) Of the 6000 people from Gaza who entered Israel that day, at most 12% were responsible for one of the 800 civilian casualties in Israel. If you consider that the minority who decided to target civilians were likely responsible for targeting multiple civilians, and that some number (at least 4 who are known) of those deaths resulted from the actions of the IDF, it's entirely possible fewer than 8% of insurgents targeted and killed civilians. All told, fewer civilians were killed proportionately than have been killed in Israel's response. What type of resistance would you have recommended Palestinians engage in prior to October 7? They tried non-violent resistance and were met with lethal force.
sosomoxie 7mo ago
Attacking the people who stole your land and murdered your family is justified in my book. I don't think I'm alone, very few people globally support Israel.
- yoavm 7mo ago
  By the wide definition of of "the people who stole your land" that you're using (meaning, no Hamas person checked who stole what land), almost everyone on earth is someone who stole someone's land. If not now, than in the previous generation. In my case as an Israeli, ~4 generations ago. In your case? I don't know. Either the people your family stole the land from X years ago have the right to attack you, or your family just managed to kill all of them years ago so there's no one to demand the land back.
  - manyaoman 7mo ago
    > By the wide definition of of "the people who stole your land" that you're using (meaning, no Hamas person checked who stole what land), almost everyone on earth is someone who stole someone's land. If not now, than in the previous generation. In my case as an Israeli, ~4 generations ago. Thanks for saying that (not sarcasm, I mean it). Peace can only start when both sides admit they’ve done wrong too.
    - sosomoxie 7mo ago
      Would you say both sides did wrong with the Nazis vs Jews? This is an identical situation (possibly worse since the Zionists actively invaded Palestine to commit genocide).
      - manyaoman 7mo ago
        It doesn't even need to involve an actual wrongdoing, even a Holocaust survivor might admit that Jews being a socially separate group in Europe may have contributed to the Nazis scapegoating them (just stating a widely accepted fact, not blaming the victims). A 100% victim mindset is rarely helpful.