-are they actively targeting civilians? If yes then bad:
-Israeli government- yes, then bad.
-Hamas- yes, then bad.
-are they following what is recognised as international law (namely the 1993 Oslo agreements):
-Israeli government- while they formally recognise Palestine as a state, they have consistently undermined the Palestinian authority and occupied much of the West Bank without a plan for either self governance or leaving, settling parts of the West Bank aggressively, therefore bad.
-Hamas- does not recognise Israel in any way and openly calls for its destruction, therefore bad.
I don’t think Hamas soldiers are usually in uniform and Hamas bases don’t have signs saying “Hamas military base” on them. They couldn’t exist if they were easily distinguishable from civilians. Naturally Israel abuses this natural opposition to their oppression by escalating the oppression.
I think the only reason Israel should exist today is that people already live there and it would be a mistake to force them out and create more displacement. That being said, Israel, a supremacist ethnostate, should never have had the right to exist… You shouldn’t exist if you have to build your fucking country on the mass graves of the native people, and then you are so deep in this shit you have to develop tech to be able to apartheid them all behind walls and systems and bullets, starving and dying. No, an entity like that should not deserve to exist. I still have hope that some reasonable Israelis will turn this all around, and Israel will stop being a genocidal mission.
You shouldn’t exist if you have to build your fucking country on the mass graves of the native people
So where do you draw the line? Most - if not all - countries were created with bloodshed at some point. People in my country moved into the area around ~1200 years ago and I don’t think the locals welcomed the new inhabitants with open arms. So should we move back then? What about the people who now line in the place we (at least assume) to had come from?
You shouldn’t exist if you have to build your fucking country on the mass graves of the native people, and then you are so deep in this shit you have to develop tech to be able to apartheid them all behind walls and systems and bullets, starving and dying. No, an entity like that should not deserve to exist.
The UN, which includes the HRW, have a historic bias against Israel that is an ongoing topic. They admitted so themselves in the past and have been called again and again to justify their strong bias that shows, among other things, in the fact they find the majority of all human rights offenses in Israel.
The focus on Israel from the UN stems form the fact that the majority of it’s members states are anti-democratic and their council is dominated by oil states and muslim states who see Israel as a thorn into their side.
While I wouldn’t call everything from the UN as propaganda, they are definitely not a neutral source for information.
The focus on Israel from the UN stems form the fact that the majority of it’s members states are anti-democratic and their council is dominated by oil states and muslim states who see Israel as a thorn into their side.
Ah yes that totally explains these results in the UNGA 🙄
All those 153 counties just want Hamas to have a great life /s
It’s not at all that they are against war crimes or genocide or anything, noooo, they’re just “biased”
All 153 of them
Only Paraguay and Israel and wherever the fuck Nauru is…
Countries still standing, flying (mostly) their original flag, with a significant chunk of peak territory remaining?
Yeah, America isn’t unique. Lots throughout history. I guess you could say most of the new world, but certainly one of the largest…with Russia, China, Canada, and maybe Australia if you stretch the definition enough (and I’m not trying to ignore or dismiss their treatment of the aboriginals in saying that).
The country Israel was founded by people who are native to the land. Perhaps read up on the history of the area, because what you are writing is factually incorrect.
There was no country before and the area was populated by multiple different groups of people. Those people wanted to found countries in the area. There is war(s) regarding where the borders of these countries should be.
That’s how almost every country in the world came into place. The only difference here is that it is taking place in a time when the whole world is watching in real time and people are much more globally mobile.
I know it’s much easier and comfortable to paint a black and white picture of the situation, but it is just false…
If they are native to the land, why did they have to massacre (Deir Yassin) and ethnically cleanse (the Nakba) the other natives? 🤔
I’m asking because Deir Yassin is the massacre that eventually convinced my grandmother’s family to leave their hometown and become refugees in Jordan, especially after the men in the village tried to fight off these “natives to the land” because they were attacking and killing everyone. Deir Yassin convinced Palestinians that they couldn’t trust these “natives”, since they don’t stick to their treaties, and go around marauding.
Jews were killed and oppressed in the area already thousands of years ago. How is that possible if they are not natives to the land?
For example during the Levant conquest or the regular and ongoing conflicts between Arabs and Jews in the area when it was still Transjordan? These conflicts are so fucking old they are mentioned in the Koran.
It’s nonsensical to try and claim Jews aren’t native there.
Please answer my question first. If they were natives to the land, why did they have to commit massacres and ethnic cleansing against the other natives of the land?
For the same reason why people do that in every country to each other. Religion, incompatible cultural values, ideologies that go against other people, … It’s sadly something people do and have done everywhere in some way or another.
In Transjordan and the greater area between Northern Africa and Asia there were countless shifts and movements, mixing and separation of groups for all kind of reasons. But I think the separation because of different religions is probably the reason that lead to the biggest rifts, at least in that place.
I don’t see how that has anything to do with whether or not a group of people is native to or had ancestry in a land.
You missed actively using civilian infrastructure for military purpose, actively using civilians as shields, targeting of civilians, and hostage taking as international laws broken by Hamas.
Yes I know, I restricted myself fairly, but outlining war crimes committed by Hamas would’ve been too long a list. Namely, not properly identifying combatente
It’s funny because the IDF did all of this just last week. All those Palestinians illegally detained in unknown locations: they are hostages, in every practical sense of the word.
You’re right, they haven’t used anyone as a human shield yet after Israel had to make it illegal to do since it was a normal occurrence. Otherwise they did the rest it seems.
My take is very simple:
-are they actively targeting civilians? If yes then bad:
-are they following what is recognised as international law (namely the 1993 Oslo agreements):
I don’t think Hamas soldiers are usually in uniform and Hamas bases don’t have signs saying “Hamas military base” on them. They couldn’t exist if they were easily distinguishable from civilians. Naturally Israel abuses this natural opposition to their oppression by escalating the oppression.
They are essentially a state (as they do control Gaza with state powers) and as such, they must abide by the rules of war just like any other
Not how the Geneva Conventions work but okay
I think the only reason Israel should exist today is that people already live there and it would be a mistake to force them out and create more displacement. That being said, Israel, a supremacist ethnostate, should never have had the right to exist… You shouldn’t exist if you have to build your fucking country on the mass graves of the native people, and then you are so deep in this shit you have to develop tech to be able to apartheid them all behind walls and systems and bullets, starving and dying. No, an entity like that should not deserve to exist. I still have hope that some reasonable Israelis will turn this all around, and Israel will stop being a genocidal mission.
So where do you draw the line? Most - if not all - countries were created with bloodshed at some point. People in my country moved into the area around ~1200 years ago and I don’t think the locals welcomed the new inhabitants with open arms. So should we move back then? What about the people who now line in the place we (at least assume) to had come from?
Just for curiosity, are you American?
Because you literally just described America.
No. You’ll be shocked, I’m Palestinian.
For that you know awfully little about the history of the area. Or you just love propaganda.
Yeah I fucking love all that “propaganda” from HRW and the UN.
The UN, which includes the HRW, have a historic bias against Israel that is an ongoing topic. They admitted so themselves in the past and have been called again and again to justify their strong bias that shows, among other things, in the fact they find the majority of all human rights offenses in Israel.
The focus on Israel from the UN stems form the fact that the majority of it’s members states are anti-democratic and their council is dominated by oil states and muslim states who see Israel as a thorn into their side.
While I wouldn’t call everything from the UN as propaganda, they are definitely not a neutral source for information.
Ah yes that totally explains these results in the UNGA 🙄
All those 153 counties just want Hamas to have a great life /s
It’s not at all that they are against war crimes or genocide or anything, noooo, they’re just “biased”
All 153 of them
Only Paraguay and Israel and wherever the fuck Nauru is…
Yep there it is, ladies and gentlemen. Anyone who reports on Israeli crimes has a bias.
Given what you know about our species and nature in general, what country in the world do you think doesn’t fit this description?
Countries still standing, flying (mostly) their original flag, with a significant chunk of peak territory remaining?
Yeah, America isn’t unique. Lots throughout history. I guess you could say most of the new world, but certainly one of the largest…with Russia, China, Canada, and maybe Australia if you stretch the definition enough (and I’m not trying to ignore or dismiss their treatment of the aboriginals in saying that).
The country Israel was founded by people who are native to the land. Perhaps read up on the history of the area, because what you are writing is factually incorrect.
There was no country before and the area was populated by multiple different groups of people. Those people wanted to found countries in the area. There is war(s) regarding where the borders of these countries should be.
That’s how almost every country in the world came into place. The only difference here is that it is taking place in a time when the whole world is watching in real time and people are much more globally mobile.
I know it’s much easier and comfortable to paint a black and white picture of the situation, but it is just false…
If they were native to the land, how do you explain Deir Yasdin or the Nakba?
??? What does that have to do with the fact that Israel is a country founded for people who are native to the land?
If they are native to the land, why did they have to massacre (Deir Yassin) and ethnically cleanse (the Nakba) the other natives? 🤔
I’m asking because Deir Yassin is the massacre that eventually convinced my grandmother’s family to leave their hometown and become refugees in Jordan, especially after the men in the village tried to fight off these “natives to the land” because they were attacking and killing everyone. Deir Yassin convinced Palestinians that they couldn’t trust these “natives”, since they don’t stick to their treaties, and go around marauding.
Jews were killed and oppressed in the area already thousands of years ago. How is that possible if they are not natives to the land?
For example during the Levant conquest or the regular and ongoing conflicts between Arabs and Jews in the area when it was still Transjordan? These conflicts are so fucking old they are mentioned in the Koran.
It’s nonsensical to try and claim Jews aren’t native there.
Please answer my question first. If they were natives to the land, why did they have to commit massacres and ethnic cleansing against the other natives of the land?
For the same reason why people do that in every country to each other. Religion, incompatible cultural values, ideologies that go against other people, … It’s sadly something people do and have done everywhere in some way or another.
In Transjordan and the greater area between Northern Africa and Asia there were countless shifts and movements, mixing and separation of groups for all kind of reasons. But I think the separation because of different religions is probably the reason that lead to the biggest rifts, at least in that place.
I don’t see how that has anything to do with whether or not a group of people is native to or had ancestry in a land.
You missed actively using civilian infrastructure for military purpose, actively using civilians as shields, targeting of civilians, and hostage taking as international laws broken by Hamas.
Yes I know, I restricted myself fairly, but outlining war crimes committed by Hamas would’ve been too long a list. Namely, not properly identifying combatente
It’s funny because the IDF did all of this just last week. All those Palestinians illegally detained in unknown locations: they are hostages, in every practical sense of the word.
Straight up lies as usual. Don’t you get tired of making stuff up?
You’re right, they haven’t used anyone as a human shield yet after Israel had to make it illegal to do since it was a normal occurrence. Otherwise they did the rest it seems.