this post was submitted on 09 Oct 2023
1170 points (90.3% liked)

Memes

45661 readers
667 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
1170
Hmmmm (lemmy.ml)
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
220 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Didn't Arabs and Palestinians just flat out refuse to coexist with a Jewish state from the start? The international community proposed a solution and they refused to accept it.

Certainly if they chose to fight, and lost, then they have to face the consequences which might include losing their land.

That's hardy unprecedented, the very city I live in was largely founded by seizing lands from the British during the American war of independence, because they lost...

I would say while yes it's "wrong" to kick someone off their land, both parties have to at least be reasonable and willing to compromise when you have a complex ethnic and religious issue. Otherwise conflict is inevitable.

None of which is to excuse any war crimes committed by either side. I just think it's more nuanced than "israel bad apartheid state".

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Didn't Arabs and Palestinians just flat out refuse to coexist with a Jewish state from the start?

"coexist with a Jewish state" is a bit of a contradictory statement. Arabs coexisted with Jews fine prior to the Zionist project. A Jewish state is by definition a state exclusive to Jews. That's the opposite of coexistnece by definition, and yes that is exactly why Arabs (Muslims and Christians alike) refused it.

Certainly if they chose to fight,

Resist*. they chose to resist occupation, expulsion from their homes, massacre and genocide.

fight, and lost, then they have to face the consequences which might include losing their land.

Ahh, so if someone fights you for your land, destroys your home and genocides your people, then they've earned it?? Well I should not be surprised that someone who lives in a nation founded on genocide thinks this is okay.

yes it's "wrong" to kick someone off their land, both parties have to at least be reasonable and willing to compromise

"hey man, I know I just took over your home and burned your family alive in front of your eyes. But you gotta be reasonable here and be willing to compromise!"

What more of a compromise do you need beyond coexistence? That's all Palestinians have asked for, and Israel continues to deny them basic rights, no matter how peaceful they are.

And I end with: Israel bad apartheid state. It is truly that simple.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Ahh, so if someone fights you for your land, destroys your home and genocides your people, then they've earned it?? Well I should not be surprised that someone who lives in a nation founded on genocide thinks this is okay.

Nice try putting words in my mouth, but I never said any of this was "OK". It doesn't have my "blessing", I merely gave my observation grounded in reality, of how the world works. Hell no, if it was up to me, everything everywhere would be resolved peacefully, fairly and with diplomacy, not violence.

Honestly given your tone and snide remarks, I suspect you are too emotionally invested on this topic, for whatever reason, to have a rational discussion.

But either way, the ability to occupy and defend land will remain the determining factor in maintaining sovereignty, now and in the future. You can't count on the international community, and you can't count on what's right or just. ( call me a pessimist, I'll agree :)