4 ms·

> Palestine is a country under a brutal military occupation and progressive illegal colonisation that has been going on for 80 years. If Mexico had started att

> Palestine is a country under a brutal military occupation and progressive illegal colonisation that has been going on for 80 years. If Mexico had started attacking the US across the border, what would the US do? I'm curious to hear what you think a country should do in this circumstance.

throw310822 8mo ago
Are the US currently illegally occupying large parts of Mexico and progressively colonising it, displacing and oppressing the Mexican population? And if that were the case, would you say that Mexico had started attacking the US across the border? Or would you say that the US are waging war against Mexico and Mexico is fighting back?
- naasking 8mo ago
  You have the timeline backwards. Palestinians attacked Jews first, then Jews occupied the invaders.
  - throw310822 8mo ago
    I disagree with this timeline (the Jews got there in the first place with the precise, declared intent of colonising somebody else's land. That's the whole point of Zionism). But more in general, there's no point in following a tit-for-tat that goes back 80 years or more with the intent of finding "who was the first". Each event further down the chain completely reverses the assessment, and you can't base any solid reasoning on such grounds. What you have to look at is the big picture: who is occupying someone else's territory? Who is oppressing the other with overwhelming force? Which side keeps taking and which keeps losing?
    - naasking 8mo ago
      > the Jews got there in the first place with the precise, declared intent of colonising somebody else's land. That's the whole point of Zionism Yes, but they were doing it by legally purchasing land, not through violent displacement. Arabs then rioted against Jewish communities, and that started the cycle of violence. And note how this push for Zionism coincides with a global expansion of antisemitism after WWI. The only place Jews could find reliable support was among their people and protected by the British who were bound to uphold the Barfour declaration. > What you have to look at is the big picture: who is occupying someone else's territory? But if you ignore the history, you can't actually determine whose territory it is can you? Jews purchased land from Arabs, Arabs repeatedly started conflicts with them and Jews repeatedly beat them back. Losers in a conflict lose territory, and the armistice following Israel's founding drew the expanded lines. As for the occupation of Gaza and the West Bank today, I agree it's problematic, but what exactly Israel supposed to do when they keep getting attacked? They were attacked after the armistice with Jordan and Egypt, so once again, they didn't start anything. If Mexico repeatedly attacked the US, they would do the same thing. Hamas continues to have over 70% support among Gazans, even now, and Hamas murders anyone who speaks against them.
      - throw310822 8mo ago
        > but they were doing it by legally purchasing land This is false- the land they purchased was only 12% of what they claimed at the moment of independence. Besides, privately buying land doesn't give you any right to declare sovereignty over it- try that in your country. > The only place Jews could find reliable support was among their people Sucks for them, but absolutely can't be used to justify a crime against a third party- the Palestinians. > Jews purchased land from Arabs, Arabs repeatedly started conflicts with them and Jews repeatedly beat them back This is entirely false and even a cursory reading of actual history (not the passively repeated Zionist propaganda points that you're exposing here) would change your mind. > As for the occupation of Gaza and the West Bank today, I agree it's problematic, but what exactly Israel supposed to do when they keep getting attacked? First of all they should not occupy any territory that doesn't belong to them, because that makes the attacks entirely reasonable and justified.
- thomassmith65 8mo ago
  Are the US currently illegally occupying large parts of Mexico This comment would depress a highschool history teacher.
  - tovej 8mo ago
    Yeah, the annexation of Texas. Which is similar to Israel / Palestine in many ways.
  - throw310822 8mo ago
    The depressing thing is that you don't know that the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was signed 178 years ago, and that territory can be legally ceded by means of peace treaties. The part of Palestine that is considered illegally occupied is the part that lies beyond the 1949 armistice borders and has never been legally ceded to Israel by any treaty.

throw310822 8mo ago

Are the US currently illegally occupying large parts of Mexico and progressively colonising it, displacing and oppressing the Mexican population? And if that were the case, would you say that Mexico had started attacking the US across the border? Or would you say that the US are waging war against Mexico and Mexico is fighting back?

naasking 8mo ago
You have the timeline backwards. Palestinians attacked Jews first, then Jews occupied the invaders.
- throw310822 8mo ago
  I disagree with this timeline (the Jews got there in the first place with the precise, declared intent of colonising somebody else's land. That's the whole point of Zionism). But more in general, there's no point in following a tit-for-tat that goes back 80 years or more with the intent of finding "who was the first". Each event further down the chain completely reverses the assessment, and you can't base any solid reasoning on such grounds. What you have to look at is the big picture: who is occupying someone else's territory? Who is oppressing the other with overwhelming force? Which side keeps taking and which keeps losing?
  - naasking 8mo ago
    > the Jews got there in the first place with the precise, declared intent of colonising somebody else's land. That's the whole point of Zionism Yes, but they were doing it by legally purchasing land, not through violent displacement. Arabs then rioted against Jewish communities, and that started the cycle of violence. And note how this push for Zionism coincides with a global expansion of antisemitism after WWI. The only place Jews could find reliable support was among their people and protected by the British who were bound to uphold the Barfour declaration. > What you have to look at is the big picture: who is occupying someone else's territory? But if you ignore the history, you can't actually determine whose territory it is can you? Jews purchased land from Arabs, Arabs repeatedly started conflicts with them and Jews repeatedly beat them back. Losers in a conflict lose territory, and the armistice following Israel's founding drew the expanded lines. As for the occupation of Gaza and the West Bank today, I agree it's problematic, but what exactly Israel supposed to do when they keep getting attacked? They were attacked after the armistice with Jordan and Egypt, so once again, they didn't start anything. If Mexico repeatedly attacked the US, they would do the same thing. Hamas continues to have over 70% support among Gazans, even now, and Hamas murders anyone who speaks against them.
    - throw310822 8mo ago
      > but they were doing it by legally purchasing land This is false- the land they purchased was only 12% of what they claimed at the moment of independence. Besides, privately buying land doesn't give you any right to declare sovereignty over it- try that in your country. > The only place Jews could find reliable support was among their people Sucks for them, but absolutely can't be used to justify a crime against a third party- the Palestinians. > Jews purchased land from Arabs, Arabs repeatedly started conflicts with them and Jews repeatedly beat them back This is entirely false and even a cursory reading of actual history (not the passively repeated Zionist propaganda points that you're exposing here) would change your mind. > As for the occupation of Gaza and the West Bank today, I agree it's problematic, but what exactly Israel supposed to do when they keep getting attacked? First of all they should not occupy any territory that doesn't belong to them, because that makes the attacks entirely reasonable and justified.
thomassmith65 8mo ago
Are the US currently illegally occupying large parts of Mexico This comment would depress a highschool history teacher.
- tovej 8mo ago
  Yeah, the annexation of Texas. Which is similar to Israel / Palestine in many ways.
- throw310822 8mo ago
  The depressing thing is that you don't know that the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was signed 178 years ago, and that territory can be legally ceded by means of peace treaties. The part of Palestine that is considered illegally occupied is the part that lies beyond the 1949 armistice borders and has never been legally ceded to Israel by any treaty.