this post was submitted on 28 Mar 2024
387 points (100.0% liked)

politics

24405 readers
4355 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- After narrowly backing Israel’s military action in Gaza in November, Americans now oppose the campaign by a solid margin. Fifty-five percent currently disapprove of Israel’s actions, while 36% approve.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Israel's actions has been a response to hamas' for Oct 7th attack. Justified??? i am sure it was and still is,given what they (hamas) did. there is no argument on this on this specificity. were there instances where israel isn't justified?? petty sure there is. it's not a blanket statement to say israel is completely justified in everything they do.

you mentioned the continued apartheid/occupation as the source of the violence, so end the occupation and accept the 2 state solution, not that hard for hamas.

this isn't a competition to see who has committed more crimes against whose population, they are crimes and those responsible should be held accountable.

you trying to villify israel and downplaying/apologising for hamas atrocities. i am not sure why you chose to be a hamas apologist,it certainly isn't helping the palestinians in anyway.

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

The concept of Transfer in Zionist thought and the displacement of Palestinians since the 1920s culminated into a full fledged ethnic cleansing campaign in 1948

The Concept of Transfer 1882-1948

Transfer Committee and the JNF led to Forced Displacement of 100,000 Palestinians throughout the mandate.

Plan Dalet

Details of Plan C (May 1946) and Plan D (March 1948)

Partition and later the Two-State Solution have been wielded by Israel to covet and annex as much Palestinian land as possible with the least amount of Palestinians.

Before 1948, Palestinian Leadership repeatedly advocated for a Unitary Binational State for decades.

The Concept of Transfer 1882-1948

Palestinian Arab Congress advocating for Unified State 1928

Arab Higher Committee advocating for Unified State 1937

Arab League advocating for Unified Binational State 1948

After the founding of Israel, the Two-State Solutions were utilized to further annex the Palestinian Occupied Territories and enact military control over Palestinians while denying them human and civil rights. Despite this, both Fatah and later Hamas have accepted a Two-State Solution on the 1967 borders, with the two most important factors being the Right of Return of Palestinian refugees and an end to the permanent occupation.

Oslo Accords MEE, NYT, Haaretz, AJ

History of peace process

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

still trying to villify israel i see.

fatah seems to be doing ok after accepting the fact that israel and palestine can co-exist. hamas o. the other hand wanted 1967 borders whithout recognizing israel and wants jurusalem as its capital. 1967 borders, israel can compromise, if land swaps and national security are addressed. Jurusalem as Palestine's capital per hamas?? yes no fucking way and hamas knows that for sure.

if israel wanted more lands,they will never have left gaza nor west bank. the settlers problem has been a thorny issues amongst the radical jewish population,its hasn't gone unnoticed and we all know that needs addressing.

dude you trying so hard to villify israel isn't helping your credibility and you are beginning to sound like those hamas propagandist/apologist on overdrive.

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

So coexistence to you is occupation? You hand-wave away all the overwhelming evidence of Apartheid and Settler Colonialism.

The state allows settlers to use land violently taken from Palestinians. Dozens of outposts and “farms” – settlements for all intents and purposes, which were built without authorization by the government and without plans that enable construction in them – receive support from Israeli authorities and remain standing. Israel has ordered the military to defend the outposts or paid for their security, as well as paved roads and laid down water and electricity infrastructure for most of them. It has provided support through various government ministries, the Settlement Division of the World Zionist Organization and regional councils in the West Bank. It has also subsidized financial endeavors in the outposts, including agricultural facilities, provided support for new farmers and for shepherding, allocated water and legally defended outposts in petitions for their removal.

Violence committed by settlers against Palestinians has been documented since the very early days of the occupation. It is recorded in countless government documents and dossiers, in thousands of testimonies from Palestinians and soldiers, in books, in reports by Palestinian, Israeli and international human rights organizations – including B’Tselem, from its inception – and in thousands of media stories. Yet this ongoing, comprehensive documentation has had almost no effect on settler violence against Palestinians, which has long since become part and parcel of life under the occupation in the West Bank.

Settler Violence is State Violence and has been intentional.

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

co-existence is accepting the facts that 1 entity has a right to exist just as any other and you do not arbitrary decide how far back in time to determine who stole whose home.

next, israeli settlers illegally settling in land that does not belong to them is a problem that needs solving,this has been made very clear,your magnification of the violence doesn't negate that fact other than pushing your bias narratives.

hamas never stopped declaring their aim to wipe israel from existence, despite their renewed charter.the fancy words they used serve nothing but to hoodwink the less sophisticated.

if your logic prevails,then prc,timor leste,previous soviet states or even america has no right to exist because they stole,occupy and settled in lands that does not belong to them and the original inhabitants should wage terror attacks on the populance because,you know,these people are stealing lands of their great grand father or however far back in time these terrorists chose.

it's sad that you have, on multiple times, try to push your bias agenda and narratives and each time you are only serving to highlight your bias.

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

Israel has never had intentions of coexistence, it was founded on Settler Colonialism... You're white washing ethnic cleansing.

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

hamas never had any intentions of co-existence only genocide and terrorism.

you are and have been justifying hamas terrorism and crimes as the aspirations of palestinians,disgusting to say the least.

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

You're literally wrong. Has Hamas done war crimes? Yes. You don't need to make things up to not like Hamas. I've provided so many resources to learn the history. Instead you'd rather justify settler Colonialism, ethnic cleansing, and collective punishment. When you do that, it's clear you don't see Palestinians as human beings.

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

i could say the same to you.

unlike you,i do not solely focus on one side's atrocities to paint the other like some kind of victim.

you are literally a hamas apologist using palestinians to push your agenda for genocide.your resources aren't exactly neutral to begin with.

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

I'm literally advocating for ending the genocide and equal rights.

Read the Reports on Apartheid and learn for yourself

Amnesty International Report

Human Rights Watch Report

B'TSelem Report with quick Explainer

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

and i am clearly saying there are no good guys in this conflict,no one side has the moral high ground over the other.

palestine and israel have the right to exist and to overly focus on the elimination/vilification of one over the other is not going to solve anything let alone your so called ending of genocide or equal rights.

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

Israel was founded on ethnic cleansing and settler colonialism, directly responsible for the ongoing apartheid, and is currently engaging in genocide.

I'm not saying Hamas if good. The majority of Palestinians don't either. Palestinians deserve a free and fair election to choose their representatives, but that's not really possible living under a violent apartheid. Israel has prevented any peace solution. Armed militant groups like Hamas are the only ones fighting against the apartheid.

This is a war between the occupied and the occupier.

To Israel, Palestinians have never had any right to exist, or human rights, or civil rights.

I agree with New Historians on a One-State Solution. If you're genuinely interested in the history of the conflict, you should read their books. They are significantly more detailed than any article and written with a huge amount of sources from both sides of the story.

The book 'A History of Modern Palestine: One Land, Two Peoples' by Ilan Pappe has a detailed account of the history since the early 1920s

How Avi Shlaim moved from two-state solution to one-state solution

‘One state is a game changer’: A conversation with Ilan Pappe

History of peace process

One State Solution, Foreign Affairs

10 Myths of Israel

Palestine and Israel: Mapping an annexation

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

you would have made a strong case...if you weren't a hamas propagandist. i am now suspecting you are anti jewish as well.

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

What is wrong with you.

Anti-zionism and criticism of the state of Israel are not at all the same as antisemitism. Israel and its actions have never and will never represent all Jewish people, regardless of how much they try to claim so.

If you're conflating the two, you are being antisemitic.

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

so far,i have been equally critical of israel and hamas.

based off your links and articles,seems like the one villifying and conflating is you.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Please tell me how I am conflating antisemitism and anti-zionism. You're the one who claimed I'm antisemitic when I've been exclusively talking about Israel.

My main sources are B'TSelem, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Ilan Pappe, Nur Mursalha, and Avi Shlaim.