Police expect about 100,000 people to join a demonstration in London demanding a ceasefire in Gaza
  • goat@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    1218·
    2 years ago

    You really shouldn’t argue this, since it always goes both ways in every single scenario.

    • atyaz@reddthat.comEnglish
      159·
      2 years ago

      When have Palestinians invaded Israeli land? Israelis are still creating illegal settlements right now.

      But more importantly, this genocide is not a two way street. There are terrorist attacks but that pales in comparison to an all out genocide. When have Palestinians leveled whole neighborhoods or dropped chemical weapons on people? Israelis are determined to kill or at least displace the millions of remaining Palestinians and it’s disingenuous to say that’s the same thing the Palestinians are doing.

      • goat@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        1310·
        2 years ago

        When have Palestinians invaded Israeli land?

        During the many times the Arab League declared war. They lost though, which is why they’ve been limited to Gaza and West bank.

        But more importantly, this genocide is not a two way street. There are terrorist attacks but that pales in comparison to an all out genocide. When have Palestinians leveled whole neighborhoods or dropped chemical weapons on people? Israelis are determined to kill or at least displace the millions of remaining Palestinians and it’s disingenuous to say that’s the same thing the Palestinians are doing.

        It very much is. The situation in Palestine and Israel has always been very back and forth, with terrorist attacks from both sides, military strikes into each other’s territories, the deaths of innocent civilians, such and such. No one is a saint here, except for those caught in the crossfire.

        • Gazumi@lemmy.worldEnglish
          106·
          2 years ago

          The Arab league time point conveniently ignores the prior land incursions into Palestine. It is like a climate change denier arguing based upon a limited or specific time bound period. Not t9 mention that Israel has consistently mentioned pushing the Palestinians into the sea. An extremist Right Wing party in charge is exactly what we see leading to the inhumane mass murders. No different to Bosnia

          • goat@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
            116·
            2 years ago

            And ignoring the Arab League point is also conveniently ignoring Russia, France and Britain occupying Palestine, as well as the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and WW1. Though, I’m not going to insult you for that, since that’s against the rules.

            • Gazumi@lemmy.worldEnglish
              62·
              2 years ago

              I agree. The point we start is with the post war determination of “A people without a land and a land without a people”. We collectively created the issue. Israel will never return to its original boundaries, but we are responsible for their expansion to date and we are currently supporting them in their current assaults.

              • goat@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
                42·
                2 years ago

                I think Israel should stop their settlement expansions into the west bank. But the land lost by Palestine and the Arab League during the wars should remain as Israel’s–such is war.

      • thatsage@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1110·
        2 years ago

        Bro, it was Iraq Lebanon Syria Yemen and friends who literally drove their Jews to Israel as refuges of genocides.

        If you don’t consider them Palastinians that’s fine.

        Palastinians regularly invade Israel with rockets and have also done so with suicide bombings and shooting and knifing etc. and sadly on the 7th with something much more horrible than anything of earlier levels.

        Yes, some Israelis are creating illegal settlements, but they’re not condoned by Israel and are taken down.

        • NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.socialBanned from community
          134·
          2 years ago

          Yes, some Israelis are creating illegal settlements, but they’re not condoned by Israel and are taken down.

          What the fuck? What the action fuck? Just… Look things up before commenting, man.

          • thatsage@lemmy.worldEnglish
            611·
            2 years ago

            I live in Israel. It’s entirely possible you and I don’t agree on what an illegal settlement is. But you are welcome to provide the reading material you mentioned…

            • NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.socialBanned from community
              103·
              2 years ago

              Settlements in the West Bank are illegal under international law. Also even taking the Israeli definition, outposts are only sometimes removed, are sometimes retroactively legalized and many are provided security by the IDF.

    • Gazumi@lemmy.worldEnglish
      137·
      2 years ago

      I have no religious affiliation or interest. What increasingly caused concern was the map of Israel 50 years ago vs the size today. Also, the incessant extremist approach of settlers bulldozing palestinian homes with support of superior force with no recourse for the dispossessed. I have never been in that position, but if my neighbour turned up with guns, knocked down my house and took my land, there would be an expectation of consequence

      • goat@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        810·
        2 years ago

        If you’re referring to the massacres being a consequence (and not justifying, I hope), know that Gaza and Hamas separate themselves from the West Bank, which is where the settlements are occurring.

        • NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.socialBanned from community
          82·
          2 years ago

          However, Hamas has launched attacks for Israeli injustive against Palestinians outside Gaza before. See the crisis in 2021.

        • SCB@lemmy.worldEnglish
          514·
          2 years ago

          There aren’t settlements in Gaza.

          Israel literally offered Palestine 99% of the west bank, all of Gaza, and half of Jerusalem, and Palestinian leadership turned it down because the deal included Israel existing.

            • SCB@lemmy.worldEnglish
              32·
              2 years ago

              I was wrong it was 97% not 99%.

              In 2000, US President Bill Clinton convened a peace summit between Palestinian President Yasser Arafat and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak. In May of that year, according to Nathan Thrall, Israel had offered Palestinians 66% of the West Bank, with 17% annexed to Israel, and a further 17% not annexed but under Israeli control, and no compensating swap of Israeli territory.[40] The Israeli prime minister offered the Palestinian leader between 91%[note 1] and 95%[41][42] (sources differ on the exact percentage) of the West Bank and the entire Gaza Strip if 69 Jewish settlements (which comprise 85% of the West Bank’s Jewish settlers) be ceded to Israel. East Jerusalem would have fallen for the most part[43] under Israeli sovereignty, with the exception of most suburbs with heavy non-Jewish populations surrounded by areas annexed to Israel.[44] The issue of the Palestinian right of return would be solved through significant monetary reparations.[45]

              Proposed in the fall of 2000 following the collapse of the Camp David talks, The Clinton Parameters included a plan on which the Palestinian State was to include 94-96% of the West Bank, and around 80% of the settlers were to become under Israeli sovereignty, and in exchange for that, Israel would concede some territory (so called ‘Territory Exchange’ or ‘Land Swap’) within the Green Line (1967 borders). The swap would consist of 1–3% of Israeli territory, such that the final borders of the West Bank part of the Palestinian state would include 97% of the land of the original borders.[49]

              Flash forward a few years to Obama and this is where shit falls apart. First, Netanyahu sets the table pretty decently and talks resume

              In June 2009, reacting to US President Barack Obama’s Cairo Address,[40] Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared for the first time[57] conditional support for a future Palestinian state[58] but insisted that the Palestinians would need to make reciprocal gestures and accept several principles: recognition of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people; demilitarization of a future Palestinian state, along with additional security guarantees, including defensible borders for Israel;[59] Palestinians would also have to accept that Jerusalem would remain the united capital of Israel, and renounce their claim to a right of return.

              But surprise! Hamas and Hezbollah

              Hamas and Hezbollah, however threatened violence, especially if either side seemed likely to compromise in order to reach an agreement

              Israel existing is nearly always the thing that stops talks, and always because of extremist pressure upon the Palestinian government. The other time they fell apart was when noted shitbird Ariel Sharon tanked them.

            • SCB@lemmy.worldEnglish
              43·
              2 years ago

              Yes

              I’ll cite it for you if genuinely curious but it’ll be tomorrow cuz I’m omw to a Halloween party