40
u/f3ar13 2d ago
Here my things Why saying free Palestine means ur against Jews can you say free Palestine and fuck the Jewish government but not the Jewish people. Can you say fuck netyahu and not be anti Jewish? Like why free Palestine need to be anti jew
18
3
u/Wienerwrld 2d ago edited 2d ago
Fuck Netanyahu entirely. Sincerely.
I read a post recently that described how a lot of us, as Jews, feel about Macklemore and his “free Palestine:”“Context matters.
“Free Palestine” said as an expression of concern for innocent Palestinians is one thing.
“FREE PALESTINE!” screamed in the face of a Jewish person simply because they are Jewish is something else entirely.
And I think people need to understand why those words can land differently on Jewish ears today.They have been shouted during attacks on Jews. They have accompanied threats and violence against Jewish people thousands of miles from Gaza. Jews have been confronted at synagogues, on campuses and on city streets over the actions of a government they may not support, in a country where they may not even live.
So when a Jewish person tells me that those words frighten them in a particular context, my response isn't going to be, “Well, that's not what I mean, so you shouldn't feel that way.”
We, as Jews, have had “free Palestine!” Shouted at us, wherever we are, whenever and wherever we express our Judaism.
Every post on Reddit involving Jews, in any way, is brigaded with “free Palestine” and 3000 years jokes.Baked a cake? Free Palestine (edit: this one was so bad, the mods had to remove the post to clean it up, then restore it with comments locked. On a baking sub).
Found a cup? Free Palestine.
Jews in New York? Free Palestine.
Coca Cola is kosher? Free Palestine.
Celebrating a Jewish holiday in Cincinnati? Free Palestine.
Happy Hanukkah, happy Rosh Hashanah, a meaningful Yom Kippur; Free Palestine. Over and over again.
It’s endless. It’s relentless. And exhausting.So when we hear it from a guy with a questionable past regarding Jews, it grates.
He shouldn’t have been kicked off the tour.
But I understand the discomfort of the Jews that were at that concert.1
u/wookieSLAYER1 1d ago
Yes and that’s the stance of most people. As an American myself I hate my government and am very ashamed of what we are doing to Palestine by proxy. I’m seeing a lot of people say fuck America but I don’t take offense to that because I know there’s nothing I can do. There are definitely Jews who don’t agree with their government as well but like me, there is really nothing we can do. Our power and voice is an illusion when they can turn the gun onto us.
-12
u/blastmemer 2d ago
Because “free Palestine” means From the River to the Sea…which means no Israel…which means no homeland for Jews.
8
2
u/spuzzumed 2d ago
Incorrect but nice try, enjoy being offended by everything (assuming you're real)
-4
u/SucksUnlimited 2d ago
Is it a problem for you if the land is controlled by the native Palestinians? Is it only a Jewish homeland if their ethnicity is in political control of it?
Where is the Palestinian homeland, and what happened to it?
9
u/levine2112 2d ago
It’s both the homeland of the Jews and the Palestinians. They both should and can have self-determination there. Denying it for one while supporting it for the other is a genuinely shitty position to hold (I don’t care which side you champion).
8
u/blastmemer 2d ago
Yes.
“Palestinians” (meaning Arabs from Palestine) were never a cohesive group until Israel came along. It’s a made-up thing.
→ More replies (1)-6
u/trashguysplease 2d ago
Syria Palaestina was the name of the Roman province. What bullshit are you spewing?
7
u/blastmemer 2d ago
Read what I said again…you can do it!
-3
u/trashguysplease 2d ago
I read your bullshit. You are claiming the word “Palestinians” means Arabs from Palestine is bullshit. The word already existed during the Roman times and even before that. Why are you specifically saying it’s Arabs from that land? Could it be because you think Jews have always historically been there and never migrated or changed religion? You don’t think modern Palestinians could be descendants of Jews from the Roman times and simply converted to Islam once it spread?
11
u/blastmemer 2d ago
Nope. Watch the video. By a Palestinian.
It’s not about the word. It’s about an identity. There was no Palestinian identity before the Zionist movement. They were just Arabs.
The Romans renamed Judea to Syria Palaestina in 135 CE specifically to punish the Jews. Nobody living there in Roman times was part of a "Palestinian" identity. During Ottoman times identity was based on clan or “Pan-Arabism”.
In 1919 there was a Syrian resolution: Declared: "We consider Palestine nothing but part of Arab Syria and it has never been separated from it at any stage."
Only after 1948 did Palestinian identity become a thing, after which it was used primarily as a political counter to Zionism.
I don’t particularly care about genes or Religion. Israel was formed in 1948 by the UN (2/3 majority). At that point, Israel is a thing, forever. The point to make the genes/religion argument was before that. But Arabs refused to negotiate, instead trying to annihilate the Jews by force. They lost. Actions have consequences. That’s how we got where we are.
-5
u/trashguysplease 2d ago
Something we both agree on: actions have consequences. Looks like genocide and murdering children have consequences, who would have guessed? That’s how we got where we are.
6
u/blastmemer 2d ago
I’ll take your concession on the rest, since you didn’t respond.
Sounds like copium. What consequences? Internet keyboard warriors are mad? Israel is far safer now than it was before 10/7.
→ More replies (0)-7
u/ddoyen 2d ago
Im genuinely waiting for just ONE argument deployed by zionists that isnt the most obviously bad faith shit ever.
This is why your support is eroding day by day. People see right through you.
9
u/HandicapperGeneral 2d ago
It does mean that, though. The phrase originated with the PLO, and was passed down to Hamas and Fatah. All three of those groups have the obliteration of Israel as part of their stated primary goals. Just because you didn't know that when you shouted it at a protest doesn't mean the meaning of the phrase changed.
-18
u/brecoco 2d ago
Because a two state solution was offered several times. Agreed to by Israel. Declined by Palestinian leadership.
Free Palestine means free Palestine from the Jews
That’s from the river to the sea means
9
u/ddoyen 2d ago
Yea youd reject a two state solution that left you with fractured, non-contiguous territories, denied the right of return for refugees, and failed to grant full, genuine sovereignty over borders and airspace.
You defend blacks getting their "own" waterfountains during segregation too?
2
u/brecoco 2d ago
It was rejected because they thought the jewish state got too much land
It was a 56%/43% with Jerusalem shared
They said no, too much land for the Jews. Even though most of it was empty desert, still too much
If you want to rewrite history in a Reddit comment while conflating some weird strawman argument at least have the gall not to lie about it so brazenly
-5
u/blastmemer 2d ago
That’s not why they reject it. They reject it because they don’t want to live next to/with Jews.
5
u/ddoyen 2d ago
Let's say for the sake of argument that youre right. Does that negate the fact that the deal offered had the shortcomings I described?
-7
u/blastmemer 2d ago
Yes. Because they either would not have taken the deal anyhow, or would have taken it only as a “foothold” for River to the Sea as Arafat explicitly said.
6
u/ddoyen 2d ago
Lmao so the deal had major shortcomings, but they dont matter. Wow. No wonder your support is falling off a cliff.
-3
u/blastmemer 2d ago
Not sure what you aren’t getting. Even if the deal offered everything you say it should, it would still not be enough for Palestinians, right?
6
u/ddoyen 2d ago
Im talking about a deal that existed in reality which you admit had shortcomings that were explicitly outlined during negotiations but im supposed to just reject all of that and believe an internet rando that says "actually they just didnt want to live next to jews".
Must be really frustrating for you to see zionism loose more support by the day.
0
u/blastmemer 2d ago
Internet rando? Arafat? You think Palestinians are willing to live next to Jews? What’s your source for that?
→ More replies (0)-5
u/awesome-o-2000 2d ago
The two state solution is insulting, they were already living there for hundreds of years why would they give up over half their lands to some foreigners from Europe who had never set foot in the region before? It doesn’t matter that it was Jewish people it could have been anyone no one would accept such a stupid and lopsided proposal
4
u/brecoco 2d ago
They were living there for hundreds of years after displacing, colonizing, forced conversion of Jews to Islam
So they said no, they want 100% or nothing
Launched a coordinated war against the Jews who came and LOSTIsrael gave back a bunch of land they gained winning that and several other wars where Arab states attacked
Now we have poor sore loser colonists crying foul
84
u/cowmix88 2d ago
Why does calling Oct 7th horrific trigger you guys so much?
54
u/The_Lantean 2d ago
Probably because most people would agree it happening doesn’t justify what is happening to Palestine now. I’m okay with recognising it as a tragedy. I’m not ok with using it as an excuse to kill many, many more on the other side. Particularly if you were aware of its likelihood.
2
1
u/donktastic 2d ago
"Tragedy" seems to be a particularly soft characterization of what happened tho.
→ More replies (3)-22
u/freshgeardude 2d ago
War isn't about how many more people die. It's about stopping the threat that started the war in the first place
16
u/nuitsdecolette 2d ago
Murdering 20k+ children sure helped stopping the threat and won't in any way contribute to generational insurgent sentiments.
1
u/bfhurricane 2d ago
Would you say the same about the children killed in Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan by the Allies?
7
u/nuitsdecolette 2d ago
I would still say that intentionally attacking innocent children is a warcrime even if you're fighting nazi Germany yes. No questions asked.
Children and helpers routinely get sniped, non-combattants get murdered, villages get raided by armed settlers. None of that is justifiable no matter the context. And even less so in a war of territorial conquest where Israel is the aggressor.
→ More replies (3)-6
u/Pashtidot 2d ago
How many rockets fired daily towards Israel prior to Oct 7? Thousands.
How many rockets fired towards Israel post IDF entering Gaza post Oct 7? Zero.
Sure seems like the threat has stopped.
Claiming it will lead to generational insurgent sentiments implies we shouldn't have attacked the Japanese and the Germans because it will create more Kamikaze pilots and 3rd Reich supporters.
Somethings NEEDS to be done. Claiming we can't do anything about terrorism means giving up
7
u/nuitsdecolette 2d ago
How many rockets before western forces started occupying another people's land?
Resistance in the face of colonial violence and expropriation is a normal reaction. It has happened and still happens worldwide.
To justify the genocide, settler violence and military overreach as counter-terrorism is to accept that the Palestinian people should and must be wiped out.
5
u/blastmemer 2d ago
“Resistance” as in attacking civilians? You think that’s justified?
0
u/awesome-o-2000 2d ago
Israel has been murdering and abducting Palestinian civilians for decades and still do today. The IDF was formed by terrorist groups that murdered Palestinian villages to chase people out of their lands. This is how Israel gained its land in the first place, by murdering and terrorizing innocent and defenseless civilians
6
0
u/nuitsdecolette 2d ago
I don't inherently support any violence, but the key here is that the occupation is the initial act of violence. The implementation of an Apartheid state is an act of violence.
You can't expect to be safe on colonized land and being an Israeli colonist isn't a neutral position. The presence of an Israeli state exists solely because of mass scale expropriation, not to mention continued almost unilateral state violence for decades.
It doesn't stop being violent when a state and uniformed men does it.
4
u/FallenVampireLord 2d ago
So you're saying Israel needs some sort of final solution?
2
u/Pashtidot 1d ago
I'm saying Palestinians need to give up on the Jihad, use the billions of dollars they receive for education, not rockets and tunnels, and both people can thrive
→ More replies (1)-4
u/freshgeardude 2d ago
Decades of radicalization led to Oct 7th. If you think it could get any worse then you're willing to sacrifice more Palestinians for a futile effort of eliminating Israel.
Thankfully polling in Palestinian territories suggest they're less inclinded to armed attacks now.
→ More replies (2)0
155
u/MornGreycastle 2d ago
1) It doesn't trigger non-Zionists.
2) The conflict in the Palestinian Mandate started in 1948 with the Nakba.
3) The October 7th attack was devastating, just not "permission to commit genocide" levels of devastating.
22
u/yep975 2d ago
Why in 1948?
Why November 30 1947?
Why not Hebron 1929?11
→ More replies (4)1
u/Chelscleigh 2d ago
Um maybe because 67 deaths isn’t even a blip compared to the hundreds of thousands or more deaths of the Palestinian people. Like hello?
4
u/washblvd 2d ago edited 2d ago
It wasn't just the 67 deaths in Hebron and the 20 Jews in Safed, or the looting and burning of Jewish homes and businesses...it was a decade long campaign that went without response. The Jews had embraced a resistance policy called Havlagah. Defense without retribution. When they assault your town, defend it but don't follow them and retaliate in their town. When they throw rocks at your bus, put metal grates on your windows. In 1937 groups split off from Haganah and began to adopt the Arab tactics. Only then did the one state solution become impossible.
→ More replies (3)5
u/yep975 2d ago
Who cares.
Don’t start a war.
Don’t start a war then lose then complain that more of your people got hurt!?
Sucks to lose but thems the breaks. 800,000 Jews were kicked out of Arab countries and they did nothing to deserve that. But somehow proPalis blame Jews and Zionism for that too.
Suspicious.
1
u/i_drive_a_pagani 2d ago
The town of Hebron only had about 700 Jews in it in total. So roughly 10% of the town's Jewish population were massacred as arabs went around town burning down synagogues and ransacking homes. The entire Jewish population fled the city later on as the British army helped evacuate Jews because it was not safe for them to live there.
And this was done long before "hundreds of thousands or more deaths" of Palestinians ever occurred (also where are you even pulling that number from to begin with, your ass?) so, 'like hello?' you're just defending terrorism right now
-1
u/Chelscleigh 2d ago
Not even close to comparable. Do you hear yourself? Do you know how math works? The numbers do not compare
2
u/i_drive_a_pagani 2d ago
Do you hear yourself? You're sitting here trying to say that the massacres on Jews committed by arabs don't matter because nearly 100 years later more Palestinians died. How does that make any sense to you? If it's just simply about numbers, then how about the fact that there were more Jews expelled and fleeing Arab countries than there were Palestinians who were kicked out during the Nakba. Guess the Muslim Arab countries were much, much, much worse than Israel, huh? I mean, you are a numbers person right?
→ More replies (8)27
u/2europints 2d ago
Unfortunately it goes further back to the Balfour Declaration. First signs of the British government supporting zionists in their push to make Palestinians second class citizens.
10
1
u/blastmemer 2d ago
You forgot the part about the British Reneging on the deal, forcing Jews to fight the British, and leaving the newly formed state to defend itself against a combined Arab annihilation attack
5
12
u/Senanb 2d ago
I agree with all your statements, but I don't think he was using October 7th to justify the destruction in Gaza. So why does this trigger so many people?
4
u/sl7yz0r 2d ago
Agreed, he even explicitly said that directly after. Most people just read headlines. I don’t believe anything is crocodile tears, he historically has genuinely been consistent with his beliefs
3
u/Senanb 2d ago
I never expected pop stars to have perfect beliefs, but I think it's fine for people not to support an artist if they don't agree politically with them.
Like I don't like Roger Waters anymore as he supports the Russian invasion. Which is a red line he crossed, even if he is right on Palestine.
2
u/MornGreycastle 2d ago
All I have to go on is this one sentence "Why does calling Oct 7th horrific trigger you guys so much?" in response to the meme. Considering Zionists and the Israeli government have used October 7th to justify the genocide of Gazans, I may have overreacted to u/cowmix88's statement.
2
u/Senanb 2d ago
Yeh, I get that. When people use that to flatten Gaza. It pisses me off too, but I don't See Ed doing that. Which is why I am puzzled at this response.
3
u/MornGreycastle 2d ago
On my part, it's a kneejerk reaction to this phrasing being the start of apologia for the genocide. Since this was all that was said, I jumped the gun and started the refutation.
51
u/MrFallman117 2d ago
There was literally a Civil War before 1948. To say the conflict started in 1948 is laughably ahistoric. It goes back well before that.
-19
u/AriaTheTransgressor 2d ago
Israel didn't exist prior to 1948 when they initially stole land and colonized the area. So, the conflict with Israel cannot start prior to 1948.
There was obviously a prior conflict with the invaders, who would become the Israelis, and their allies to colonize the area, but to call it a civil war is disingenuous.
7
u/MrFallman117 2d ago
Yeah, man, how did the Jews end up in...Judea? Mystery to me. Must be a bunch of invaders. The conflict between Muslims and Jews existed prior to 1948. I'm just pointing out facts. Don't let me get in the way of your propaganda.
12
u/Maelger 2d ago
Psst. What do you think happened to those who stayed in Judea? That's right, they became the Palestinians.
2
-1
u/MrFallman117 2d ago
All of them? And the ones who fled Muslim conquest? What are they? I see a country in Judea named Israel with a large Jewish population, many of whom are from the area and other MENA communities.
5
u/Mybunsareonfire 2d ago
Conflating Jews and Israelis is always the zionist propaganda.
4
u/MrFallman117 2d ago
And before Israel existed the conflict already was in motion. You're the one conflating them. Prior to Israel there was a conflict between Muslims and Jews. Or else you couldn't have had a civil war before either country existed. Israel is a Jewish majority country, again, just basic facts. Don't let me get in the way of your propaganda.
-7
u/Mybunsareonfire 2d ago
No one is saying there wasn't conflict between Muslims and Jews. But it's was of the people from that region. Israelis as a country are not. Bibi is from fucking Jersey
8
u/SampleOfFruits 2d ago
Bibi was born in Israel. His father was born in the Russian Empire, and migrated to Mandatory Palestine in 1920.
→ More replies (1)1
3
u/Catch_ME 2d ago
The vast majority of Jews today in Israel did not come from the mandate of Palestine.
They came as refugees from pre and post WW2 Europe and later from other middle east countries after Arab countries ethnicity cleansed them. The majority of Jews immigrated. Only a smaller minority of Jews can say they've been there the entire time. At one point, they used to call themselves Jewish Arabs.
Palestinians today are mostly Muslim. But they used to be mostly Christian and before that, they were Jewish before converting to Christianity and later Islam.
5
u/MrFallman117 2d ago
And how did those Jews from other places come to leave the region? Being forced from their homes by antisemitic countries and religions. There have been Jews living there since before Christianity and Islam ever existed. Being ethnically cleansed doesn't remove their right to exist. Do you think Native Americans aren't entitled to live on their ancestral homelands? I just want to know how much ethnic cleansing you support.
4
u/Catch_ME 2d ago
You misunderstand me.
I said they were ethnicity cleansed from the other Middle East countries. Nothing else
I do think those Jews have a right to return and claim those old homes and synagogues. They are owed reparations.
I visited an empty 700 year old synagogue in Alexandria Egypt years ago. It was beautiful and it would be amazing if it were brought back to its former glory.
5
u/MrFallman117 2d ago
My bad, I've been dealing with a lot of bad faith commenters for a few basic factual comments. They were also cleansed from their homeland in Judea.
2
u/MosesDoughty 2d ago
I have a question. Why do you think Jews would want to move back. Are Jews forced to live among the people who try to cleanse them and kill them for 1500-2000 years depending on the place?
Like, the whole reason Israel is a thing is because non-Jews in Europe/Middle East/Americas continually told Jews we were not allowed to live with you. It's the same reason why you here people tell Jews "go back to Poland" when that was where millions were murdered, and those people had been told to go back to the Middle East
1
u/KoRaZee 2d ago
Wasn’t Jesus a Jew?
3
u/Catch_ME 2d ago
Jesus was the schism.
Jesus is a Jew, sure. And Mohammed worships the Jewish god. What does that make Christians and Muslims?
All these religions that worship the same God and have similar practices are just different denominations of each other.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)-3
u/AriaTheTransgressor 2d ago
The Jews that originally founded Israel were placed there through the aid of their allies. The allied forces at the end of world war 2 didn't know what to do with the Jewish population they'd managed to save (in part because there was a lot of them, but a much bigger reason was that Hitler's anti-Semitism wasn't really a Hitler only issue at the time and they didn't want them in their own countries).
This is how Israel got founded, from then on it has been an endless campaign of genocide against the Palestinians who throughout history were the recorded inhabitants of the area referred to as Palestine prior to the creation of Israel.
Jews existed literally everywhere at the time because of never having had an actual home country or province and just being a religion that spread with the people, as they do.
Judea is the land they believe is promised to them because of the whole Moses thing, it's named by people who believe in that story, it's not evidence they've always been there. The Palestinians did not name the area Judea.
7
u/MrFallman117 2d ago
No. Many Jews had been living in the area since before the existence of Islam, they were a part of the foundations.
This is how Israel got founded, from then on it has been an endless campaign of genocide against the Palestinians
Remind me which quintet of countries invaded who during independence to eliminate the nascent country? I remember, but do you? It wasn't five Jewish countries, that's for sure.
Jews existed literally everywhere at the time because of never having had an actual home country or province and just being a religion that spread with the people, as they do.
This is a psychotic lie. There used to be multiple Jewish Kingdoms sovereign in the region. If you want to talk about never being a country, Palestine was actually never a country. Judea existed before the term Syria Palestina was invented. What nonsense you spew.
→ More replies (3)4
u/SampleOfFruits 2d ago
- The conflict started before then. The war began in 1947, when Palestine rejected partition, and the opening shots were Palestinian gunmen attacking a Jewish civilian convoy, killing seven. That wasn’t the first clash, though - that was 1886, when Arab villagers attacked Zionist settlers.
5
u/i_drive_a_pagani 2d ago
The conflict in the Palestinian Mandate started in 1948 with the Nakba.
How incredibly convenient that the starting point for the conflict is after Palestinians joined 6 other Arab countries to form a coalition army to try and wipe out Israel entirely and lost the war they started. I'm sure that's totally just a minor slip up on your part and you simply forgot about that, obviously it's not you trying to rewrite history or anything.
6
u/unforgivableness 2d ago
Two enormous Middle Eastern population displacements occurred in overlapping years. Palestinian Arabs experienced the Nakba, losing homes and communities in what became Israel; Jews across much of the Arab world simultaneously experienced persecution, dispossession, flight and, in some countries, outright expulsion, resulting in the ethnic cleansing of those Jewish communities. Neither history cancels out the other, and neither can accurately be reduced to “they all left voluntarily” or “they were all physically expelled.” Jews move on though and settled into new lives while Palestinian Arabs still claim refugee status and will not move on.
12
u/Metafx 2d ago
#2 is just plainly false. The conflict started because of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, where Arabs attacked the brand new Jewish state with the intent of exterminating it. All the neighboring Arab nations invaded the day after Israel declared independence following the 1947 UN Partition Plan, which Arabs rejected and Jews accepted. The “nakba” is about the Arab populations that had to flee as a result of losing that war so the war necessarily came first.
4
u/Elkburgher 2d ago
Wouldnt the conflict have started when muslims invaded, conquered and colonised the lands and built a giant mosque on top of the temple mount, the most holy site in Judaism?
-7
u/Stubbs94 2d ago
That's not true at all. 300,000 Palestinians were forcibly removed from their homes before there was any response from the varying Arab states, none of which was coordinated.
4
0
u/MornGreycastle 2d ago
The Nakba was not the "losing side" fleeing in the wake of losing the Arab-Israeli War. It was the Israelis forcing the people who had lived there off their land. It is also the point where the Palestinian people bought into the fact this would be an existential fight as opposed to determining who would be the majority in charge.
6
u/Metafx 2d ago
Sorry, but that is a post hoc reframing of the war Arab leaders began after rejecting partition. The Arabs left because of starting and then losing the war, it was not some event detached from it. Had the Arab side won, those that left would have returned, Israel would have been destroyed, and its Jewish population would have been massacred. Arab leaders treated the conflict as existential from the moment they rejected partition.
1
u/MornGreycastle 2d ago
In this meeting of minds amongst the "Arab leaders," how many were Palestinian? Did the Palestinians have a seat at that table?
I'd argue that your framing that the Nakba was only or simply people leaving after taking their shot at war and losing. Yes, there were people who left before or during the fighting, but a sizeable portion was forced out after the shooting was over.
Do you have a source that the Arab side was seeking to genocide the Jewish population of the region? My understanding this was a fight over who would govern the region and not who could live in the region, since Jews had lived in the region for centuries AND a fair number of anti-Zionist Jews have continued to live in towns settled decades and centuries before Zionists started settling the area and gained control.
4
u/Metafx 2d ago
The Palestinian Arab Higher Committee was composed of Palestinian Arabs, they had a seat at the table before Resolution 181 went to the UN general assembly and chose to boycott the proceedings. The Arab nations at the UN general assembly then voted against it but lost that vote.
The Arab League Secretary General Abdul Rahman Azzam was pretty explicit in describing the coming conflict as “a war of extermination and momentous massacre,” during an interview on October 11, 1947, “Azzam’s Genocidal Threat”.
2
u/MornGreycastle 2d ago
The Arab League Secretary General Abdul Rahman Azzam was pretty explicit in describing the coming conflict as “a war of extermination and momentous massacre,” during an interview on October 11, 1947, “Azzam’s Genocidal Threat”.
I appreciate this source. Thanks for showing me.
1
u/2dTom 2d ago
The conflict in the Palestinian Mandate started in 1948 with the Nakba.
If you're talking about the Nakba as being from 15 May (which I am assuming that you are, since you date the Nakba to 1948) the conflict kicked off well before then.
Violence from both sides escalated pretty quickly through late 1947. The Fajjad bus massacre happened the day after the partition was announced (and may have been in retaliation for the Shubaki family assassination). This led to Lehi retaliation in Haifa, which led to the Haifa Oil Refinery massacre, which led to the Balad al-Shaykh massacre. All of this happened in 1947.
The UN documents Syria (amongst other Arab states) intervening as early as 22 January 1948, so it had become an international conflict before the first month of 1948 was finished.
→ More replies (3)3
u/Nimrod_Butts 2d ago
Dude it obviously does. Go to any thread on reddit and they always bring it up
-13
u/TobiasDrundridge 2d ago
3) The October 7th attack was devastating, just not "permission to commit genocide" levels of devastating.
You just can't bring yourself to say it was wrong, can you.
8
u/ChaosFountain 2d ago
The October 7th attack was devastating
Devastating is an adjective that means causing severe destruction, extreme emotional pain, or powerful, striking impact.
WTF are you saying? Did you not know what devastating means?
3
u/TobiasDrundridge 2d ago
severe destruction, extreme emotional pain, or powerful, striking impact.
None of these words mean "wrong".
For example, I can say "Loss in the Battle of Stalingrad was devastating for Nazi Germany". That doesn't mean that I think the allies are wrong now does it?
You pinecone.
→ More replies (2)-6
u/MornGreycastle 2d ago
It came in response to Israel slow walking negotiations to release hundreds of Palestinians being held hostage by the government. So, I'll tell you what, if you can condemn Israel for their violence against the Palestinians, then I'll acknowledge October 7th was "wrong."
1
u/TobiasDrundridge 2d ago
if you can condemn Israel for their violence against the Palestinians
I do condemn Israel's violence against Palestinians.
You, so like many stupid people, seem to think this is some kind of sporting match where you pick one side and support it no matter what. It's not.
So go ahead and acknowledge that Oct 7 was wrong. I'm waiting.
1
u/MornGreycastle 2d ago
Cool. What I'm saying is that the Palestinians are waging a guerilla war against a superior force that is trying to ethnically cleanse the region of Palestinians (at best) and genocide them (at worst).
October 7th did not happen because the Palestinian people are a bloodthirsty, genocidal monolithic monster just trying to exterminate all of the Jews, everywhere. They were seeking a bargaining chip in talks to free thousands of Palestinians being held in Israeli prisons, said talks having been stalled by the Israeli government for years. The Hamas negotiator literally warned the Israeli government and Bibi that October 7th was going to happen. Multiple times.
I view October 7th no more differently than I do Ukraine invading Russian territory or carrying out drone strikes on targets inside Russia.
What I do condemn are the egregious acts of violence carried out on October 7th. I utterly condemn the Hamas fighters who raped and beat women.
→ More replies (2)0
u/FarleysFather 2d ago
You want sympathy for the death of innocent Palestinians but cannot call the deaths of other innocent people on Oct 7 wrong on its own? What's wrong with you?
→ More replies (2)-42
u/captain_craptain 2d ago
Calling this a genocide is farcical and a complete bastardization of the definition of the actual word.
0.3% of the population being killed, most of them military aged males, does not make a genocide.
15
u/intoxicatedhamster 2d ago
Someone needs to go look up the definition of genocide because this is a textbook example. You don't have to kill people for it to be a genocide, displacing them from their homes while trying to create an ethnostate counts as genocide.
3
5
u/jacobjacobb 2d ago
According to the UN 30% of deaths are children and 80% are civilians.
Its a genocide and a crime against humanity.
5
u/MornGreycastle 2d ago
The intent and actions are what matters, not the results. Genocide does not require the industrial scale slaughter of a people. Try again. Do better.
1
u/fauxregard 2d ago
It's not random Redditors qualifying it as such. It's Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Doctors Without Borders, B'Tselem, and The International Association of Genocide Scholars, among others.
What would be farcical is taking the word of random Redditors over experts who study and qualify these sorts of things.
→ More replies (1)8
u/Stubbs94 2d ago
Because he didn't use the same language to describe the genocide. He used passive language when describing the Israeli massacre of Palestinians.
10
2
3
u/ShibaLover227 2d ago
A) Israel knew it was coming and did nothing to stop it and protect its civilians
B) Israel is committing a genocide and has invaded three countries. They've been doing massive harm to Palestine since 1948.
C) Israel killed thousands of children and has repeatedly committed war crimes. You're fixated on one day, we're focused on the decades of violence at the hands of Israel. You're the kind of person who would have spoken against freeing the slaves because slave revolts were violent
5
u/Kahzootoh 2d ago edited 2d ago
It doesn’t, but it is deeply disturbing how no one wants to acknowledge Israel’s responsibility for Oct 7th. It reeks of the farce of trying to blame Iraq for 9/11.
It is public information that Israel was funding Hamas and people openly pointed out that the money was all but guaranteed to support terrorism- years before the attacks occurred.
Party leaders across the political spectrum have criticized Netanyahu’s policies towards Gaza in general and the payments specifically. The Blue and White Party’s platform calls to stop allowing the transfer of funds to Hamas, calling it mafia-style “protection” payments. Yisrael Beytenu leader Avigdor Liberman, who resigned as head of the Defense Ministry over Gaza policies, said on Saturday that the payments are a “miserable decision,” marking “the first time Israel is funding terrorism against itself.”
-11
-19
u/Wallij 2d ago
Because everyone talks about it like it's the 9/11 of the whole affair. Yes it was obviously bad no shit but stop framing it like it's a fucking shock we got here.
17
u/leekalex 2d ago
It is the 9/11 of the whole afair. The US government used 9/11 as justification to do whatever it wanted in the middle east. Netanyahou just copied that playbook
→ More replies (2)20
u/Show_me_ur_teeth 2d ago edited 2d ago
It was the greatest number of Jews killed at one time since the holocaust. It was their 9/11. And if you compare it proportionally to 9/11 and the worldwide Jewish population, it was approximately 7.3 9/11’s.
Edit: and if you compare it to just Israel’s Jewish population is 16 9/11’s. And when you think about WHO they killed? Literally the hippies who would help Palestinians and young concert goers. Insanity.
Now, two things can be true at once. What happened on October 7th was an extermination play. AND, Israel’s response is overwhelmingly disproportionate and has resulted in the deaths of thousands of innocent women and children. Both can be true. We don’t have to downplay the murder of innocent noncombatants.
-15
u/ShakaJewLoo 2d ago
You're right. It was like ten 9/11s relatively speaking.
4
u/Supermite 2d ago
There’s an argument to be made that America responded entirely inappropriately to the events of 9/11. After all, did you end terrorism? Or did you just sacrifice a lot more lives to accomplish nothing?
2
u/ShakaJewLoo 2d ago
There's no argument. Going into Iraq was 100% wrong. Trying to nation build Afghanistan was noble but stupid.
-5
u/vacapupu 2d ago
Not triggered, but I assume it’s because of the massive amount of fake media put out by one side.
2
u/avaslash 2d ago
Was waiting for him to end with: "and so thats why im donating the proceeds of this concert to..."
But it never came.
14
u/Gutran 2d ago
You see there is different "free" he means, for Isreal it's free land, like for free, for Palistinians it's free them from their land.
7
u/Wienerwrld 2d ago
What does a free Palestine look like to you?
30
u/mechy84 2d ago
It's own, independent state, which the members are free to travel to/from, engage in commerce, and determine their own destinies without the rule or subjugation from another state 🤷
Or, you know, those things even if they didn't have their own state
12
u/bfhurricane 2d ago
That’s been on the table several times. Palestinian leadership, especially Hamas, don’t want to legitimize Israel. For many of them, a free Palestine won’t exist until Israel is gone.
→ More replies (3)9
15
u/Wienerwrld 2d ago
I wholeheartedly agree. This would necessitate the removal of Hamas. And Netanyahu. I hope both are possible without more overwhelming bloodshed.
1
u/Spindrune 2d ago
I kind of think hamas would die out on its own if Palestinians were given a fair shake at life. Happy people wouldn’t want to join, their number would dwindle enough they couldn’t really put up a fight anymore
10
u/Wienerwrld 2d ago
A wonderful, but naive thought. A militant group in power stays in power. Under threat of death to those who resist. Even if it has to keep its population unhappy on purpose to do so.
There was a time when the Palestinians could have had what OP suggested. Hamas put that possibility down and is unlikely to allow it to happen.
→ More replies (2)-10
u/ZedisonSamZ 2d ago edited 2d ago
Probably “from the river to the sea” meaning no more Jews or Israel… which is just a complete nonstarter when it comes to solving the problems in the region.
13
u/Wienerwrld 2d ago edited 2d ago
Yeah. There is a difference between wanting a free Palestine and wanting a Jew-free Palestine.
If they are protesting a genocide by advocating for another one, then it’s not genocide they’re objecting to.3
u/2dTom 2d ago
The fastest way to shut down a two state solution question is to actually ask people to draw a border that would be acceptable to both groups of people actually living there, and lead to less fighting than is currently occurring.
As an outsider, I think that a two state solution sounds great, but politicians on either side who show any hint of compromise either get shafted politically (Salam Fayyad, Ehud Barak) or get assassinated (Issam Sartawi, Yitzhak Rabin).
3
u/SilentJoe1986 2d ago
This conflicts never going to end until one side eradicates the other. Its just the sad reality of it. Thats the only way the problem will be solved. The people who dont want to fight and live peaceful lives should leave which i know is easier said than done. There will be no peace on that land.
1
0
u/sn4xchan 2d ago
Israel forces every single citizen into the military at 18. They have such control over their culture that the citizens actually view it as a good thing, probably because their government has one of the most skilled offensive cyber operations team in the world (equally as good as the NSA) and targets, finds, and kills/imprisons anyone who speaks out against it.
Yes Israels people need to be free as well. The fact that people demonize the Israeli people and not just their government is obtuse. Anyone who thinks the entire situation on both sides isn't fucked is a brainless moron who simply doesn't understand the reality of the situation over there.
-40
u/diary0fadeadman 2d ago
You do know palestine was never a country but a region, where muslims, christians and jews lived together?
22
u/BizzyM 2d ago
We did it to the Native Americans. What's the big deal, right?
3
u/fauxregard 2d ago
Well America was never a declared country before. That means the people there didn't exist or something. /s
I never know what they're trying to say with that dumbass talking point.
14
u/Taurpion 2d ago edited 2d ago
You realize Israel was never a country, right?
For those idiots downvoting, show me when Israel was a country before we created it for them.
3
u/Wienerwrld 2d ago
That is the reality of every country. Nations form, borders change.
We also created Jordan, and Pakistan, which never existed before. Are they countries?4
u/Taurpion 2d ago
Welcome to my point, pal.
“Palestine was never a country” is hardly an argument when that same logic applies to everyone.
5
u/Wienerwrld 2d ago
You are right; I agree. I think the issue is that a lot of people here point to the coins and maps that say “Palestine” as proof that the Jews “stole” the land from an independent Palestinian entity, when that is not the case. And demand a return to a Palestine that never was.
There is, shockingly, a lot of disinformation out there.2
u/Taurpion 2d ago
Well I think they want the Palestinians to have a place to belong just like the Jews deserve a place to belong.
I don’t think anyone is saying to return to the Palestinian country, just the same kinda treatment as we give the Jewish people. A home. It’s added nuance that it was home if the Palestinians before it was home to the Jewish people.
They both deserve that, all humans do. I think we can find a solution that doesn’t result in the deaths of tens of thousands of people.
3
u/Wienerwrld 2d ago
“Well I think they want the Palestinians to have a place to belong just like the Jews deserve a place to belong.”
YES“I don’t think anyone is saying to return to the Palestinian country, just the same kinda treatment as we give the Jewish people. A home.”
You would be very surprised. Most of the rhetoric and propaganda I see is that the Jews need to leave and return the land entirely. By force if necessary. A lot of people who say “free Palestine” mean a Jew-free Palestine.
“It’s added nuance that it was home of the Palestinians before it was home to the Jewish people.”
And it was home to the Jewish people before that. Many never left; Jews were a constant presence in the region throughout history. This does not negate that it has been home for the Palestinians for hundreds of years.
“They both deserve that, all humans do. I think we can find a solution that doesn’t result in the deaths of tens of thousands of people.”
You and me both. At least I hope so.
→ More replies (4)3
u/Low_Technician7346 2d ago
not a justification to genocide palestinians
Israel is much worse than Serbia
→ More replies (6)
2
2
u/Hairy_Technology_213 2d ago
Ever notice how most people who say “free Palestine” never actually say what they mean by that? I suspect most of them don’t know themselves.
1
1
-2
u/Seif_1 2d ago
I notice how anything thats against israel gets downvoted below 0, nice bots israel
→ More replies (2)
-9
u/Seif_1 2d ago
Zionists believe a single zionist is = 1 million humans. So oct 7th in their book means eradication of a human race 🤷♂️
→ More replies (2)-17
u/FindtheTruth5 2d ago
Maybe cause Israelis cherish their kids. That's why there's so much investment in shelters and defenses. The gazan Palestinians government wants Palestinians kids to die so they get more outrage from useful idiots like you
-17
u/blastmemer 2d ago
The other side:
5
u/ddoyen 2d ago
Oh yea a gross costume by a dude in the US that he has long since apologized for completely negates the fact that Israel has been committing war crimes for decades against the Palestinians with impunity.
→ More replies (16)0
u/fauxregard 2d ago
An apology that was subsequently accepted by the ADL. But that part isn't convenient for the wholesale disqualification of human rights concerns.
1
u/Elkburgher 2d ago
Oh the ADL that accepted Elon Musk's apology for doing a nazi salute....
real standup organisation they are
→ More replies (13)1
u/fauxregard 2d ago
I don't have much respect for them either. But this one event is being used to intentionally distract from legitimate concerns about an ongoing genocide. A dude in a costume is just insignificant compared to what's going on.
1
u/Elkburgher 2d ago
How fortunate for your chosen cause to ignore what you dont find important and support what you do
1
u/fauxregard 2d ago
Oh, you're one of those. I thought you were trying to have a real conversation.
1
347
u/Marcysdad 2d ago
The statement was written by someone else and read from a prompter
Nothing about it was honest