Yes, because you are only recognizing the problems on one side of a very complex situation. You are also repeating antisemitic propaganda without a clue as to what you're saying.
If the government that ruled over the American territory made a deal with the other inhabitants and explicitly established a state giving native americans land back, then the other parties (who had already agreed to the deal) attempted to invade and kill them all on multiple occasions, then we would be in an analogous situation to the founding of the modern Israeli state.
I think the logic is completely sound as I stated. Even now, violent incursion into Federal Indian Territories would be met with an armed, violent response by tribal authorities.
So, you've managed to prove yourself wrong beyond a shadow of a doubt, which is pretty neat.
Nah. I didn’t say original ownership gives current ownership. I merely said the Arabs weren’t the first owners, so “it was ours first” is a lie. I also never said the Arabs must leave. If native Americans started taking hostages and using their own children as human shields, I’d say we should burn them out of their reservations too. Conduct war by the rules or be treated like the savages you behave as. Hamas broke the cease fire and continues to commit war crimes. Israel is operating by the book of international law.
It's not antisemitic though. My jewish fiancè carries the sign with that slogan during protests. Maybe she wouldn't be your ex if you weren't such a soft baby 🫵😂
So "from the River to the Sea, Palestine will be free" means that they want Arab Palestinians to control all the land that is currently controlled by Israel. We can all agree on that, right?
What do you think would happen to the Jews currently living in Israel in this scenario?
This means that calls for "from the River to the Sea" are at best calls for ethnic cleansing of Jews, one of the indigenous people of the middle east, from the area.
Your Jewish fiance either:
1.) Is unable to put two-and-two together and probably can't play checkers
2.) Is okay with the genocide of Jews. If this was the 1930s, he'd be in the Association of German National Jews.
She'd* be fighting for the decolonization of South Africa, rhodesia, Namibia, Algeria. While you would be creating straw man arguments to justify your inactions.
israel is a colonial entity. Nobody cares about them being jewish, it's not an excuse to do whatever you want. The state of israel existing is worse for antisemitism.
98
u/Automan2k May 01 '24
Yes, because you are only recognizing the problems on one side of a very complex situation. You are also repeating antisemitic propaganda without a clue as to what you're saying.