Was: Israel is at War; Now: Scoopers diagnose your anti-Semitism

[dgies9156]

This wasn't mentioned in this video, but I also doubt that Iran actually wants to go through the effort of getting rid of Israel anyway. Israel provides the mullahs with a nice common enemy whenever things start to go south internally within Iran.

Bingo!!!

If Iran turns the heat down on Israel, the light begins to shine on the troubles inside Iran. Stop hating Israel and guess what, much of the hate in the theocracy in Iran exists goes away.

Take away the hate and one takes away the Iranian theocracy's reason to exist.

[JWags85]

We also bombed Palestinians out of their homes and helped create what turned into an apartheid state in Israel. Rather than the Allies being willing to cede territory of their own for a new Jewish home state, they deliberately created the situation that led to where we are now.

Allies did cede their territory. The British and the French controlled the area after routing the Ottomans out.

A Jewish state in the Middle East makes sense in a historical and cultural framework.  A Jewish state derived from territory the "Allies ceded", presumably in Western Europe makes no sense and rest on this silly notion of Israel as a bunch of European settlers, when not even 40% of the Jewish population is descended from Western European Jews.  And Jews only make up 74% of Israel.  So less than a third of Israel are "Europeans"

The idea of a "Palestine", and a unified identity/Palestinian state, only came about in response to Jewish migration and Israel.  It's not like there was some long fight for a Palestinian state in the 1800s that got thrown aside for Israel.  The main group pushing the Ottomans out to change the whole region was Saudis from the region along the Red Sea.

That's not to lessen any sort of Palestinian identity and desire for a state going on right now.  Nor to blanket justify Israeli actions over the years.  But there is a lot of revisionist history suggesting that the Palestinian people/cause/general goal 75/100/125 years ago was anything like it is today.

[brewcity77]

Palestinians had been the majority population in that territory for 800+ years. By ceding territory, I mean territory that wasn't densely populated like that land was. And "historical and cultural framework" loses its luster centuries later. I mean, anyone making that argument in this country should pack up and head back to wherever their ancestors came from unless their Native Americans because the Native Americans have a lot more modern claim to this entire country than 1940s Jews had to Israel.

I agree that there wasn't land in Europe for them, but there was land in the United States, in Canada, in Australia, and in other countries. Maybe it should've been our duty as the new world power to cede part of the American West, particularly after we refused Jewish immigrants that ended up turned back to concentration camps.

But we are where we are. That ship has sailed. Which means moving forward with things as we made them, flawed or not. And that means a 2-state solution. But the longer Israel pursues vengeance over vision the more death and destruction will follow in the generations to come.

[The Sultan]

There was never really a Palestinian identity as a separate ethnic group until the early 1900s. They were basically Arabized Muslims who lived in Palestine.

But the creation of the State of Israel wasn't about who was actually living there at the time. There was hardly any Jews there when the Balfour Declaration came about in 1917.  It was basically the West doing what the West did at the time - carving up the world believing that they knew best.

[brewcity77]

There was never really a Palestinian identity as a separate ethnic group until the early 1900s. They were basically Arabized Muslims who lived in Palestine.

But the creation of the State of Israel wasn't about who was actually living there at the time. There was hardly any Jews there when the Balfour Declaration came about in 1917. It was basically the West doing what the West did at the time - carving up the world believing that they knew best.

Which is why the only option now is to make the best of the world as it is, not as it should be. Two state solution. With heavy investment into Gaza and a Palestinian state to insure they don't just survive, but thrive.

[forgetful]

Allies did cede their territory. The British and the French controlled the area after routing the Ottomans out.

A Jewish state in the Middle East makes sense in a historical and cultural framework.  A Jewish state derived from territory the "Allies ceded", presumably in Western Europe makes no sense and rest on this silly notion of Israel as a bunch of European settlers, when not even 40% of the Jewish population is descended from Western European Jews.  And Jews only make up 74% of Israel.  So less than a third of Israel are "Europeans"

The idea of a "Palestine", and a unified identity/Palestinian state, only came about in response to Jewish migration and Israel.  It's not like there was some long fight for a Palestinian state in the 1800s that got thrown aside for Israel.  The main group pushing the Ottomans out to change the whole region was Saudis from the region along the Red Sea.

That's not to lessen any sort of Palestinian identity and desire for a state going on right now.  Nor to blanket justify Israeli actions over the years.  But there is a lot of revisionist history suggesting that the Palestinian people/cause/general goal 75/100/125 years ago was anything like it is today.

Not sure this is completely accurate historically. The British and French aligned with a bunch of different Arab groups promising them land/country in exchange for fighting the Ottoman Empire. At that time, there was an agreement/plan to establish Arab control of what is now Palestine.

Saying that prior to that there wasn't a big fight/push for a Palestinian state doesn't really make sense historically. The area was under Arab control, and the Palestinians already lived there. Most of the ruling parties before and after in the vicinity wanted the creation of an Arab controlled region that would preserve the holy land for all.

[Hards Alumni]

Allies did cede their territory. The British and the French controlled the area after routing the Ottomans out.

A Jewish state in the Middle East makes sense in a historical and cultural framework.  A Jewish state derived from territory the "Allies ceded", presumably in Western Europe makes no sense and rest on this silly notion of Israel as a bunch of European settlers, when not even 40% of the Jewish population is descended from Western European Jews.  And Jews only make up 74% of Israel.  So less than a third of Israel are "Europeans"

The idea of a "Palestine", and a unified identity/Palestinian state, only came about in response to Jewish migration and Israel.  It's not like there was some long fight for a Palestinian state in the 1800s that got thrown aside for Israel.  The main group pushing the Ottomans out to change the whole region was Saudis from the region along the Red Sea.

That's not to lessen any sort of Palestinian identity and desire for a state going on right now.  Nor to blanket justify Israeli actions over the years.  But there is a lot of revisionist history suggesting that the Palestinian people/cause/general goal 75/100/125 years ago was anything like it is today.

Oh come on.  The age of colonialism was over. 

Not to mention, the Jewish people hadn't controlled that part of the world for centuries.  Gifting that land was a mistake, but a deliberate one to prevent the reestablishment of the Islamic Caliphate after the fall of the Ottoman Empire which had also been on decline for a long time.  The lines that were drawn in the Middle East by the French and the English were intentionally terrible to make sure that the people in the region were constantly at war with each other to keep them weak.  The USSR learned this lesson and did the same with it's smaller SSRs (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, etc.)  And look how effective it has been!  The West wanted the oil in the region and the best way to secure it was to keep everyone fighting each other.

Creating the state of Israel from whole cloth was a terrible idea.  Setting up a UN administered state with a charter/constitution for equal rights for all people would have been a much better idea.  We were pretty good at creating something from nothing post WW2 and what we created there was a tinderbox that was assured to explode constantly.

This was the last desperate gasp of colonialism.  "If we can't keep em, we will keep em weak."

[JWags85]

Not sure this is completely accurate historically. The British and French aligned with a bunch of different Arab groups promising them land/country in exchange for fighting the Ottoman Empire. At that time, there was an agreement/plan to establish Arab control of what is now Palestine.

Saying that prior to that there wasn't a big fight/push for a Palestinian state doesn't really make sense historically. The area was under Arab control, and the Palestinians already lived there. Most of the ruling parties before and after in the vicinity wanted the creation of an Arab controlled region that would preserve the holy land for all.

Yea but controlled by who Hashemites (Jordan), Hejazis (Western Saudi), Egypt?  They just wanted the Turks out.  Color me skeptical that there would have magically been a new "neutral" Arab state not controlled by one of those countries expanding their borders.  Not to mention the Shammar/Rashidi Emirate to the East that was fighting and aligned with the Turks.

Oh come on.  The age of colonialism was over. 

By the end of WWII, sure. But not in 1917 when things began happening post-Ottoman.  It was very much still part of the mentality, for better or actually for worse.

Not to mention, the Jewish people hadn't controlled that part of the world for centuries.

But neither did anyone who would have wanted to claim it. The Ottomans had it 400 years.  The few hundred years before that been a collection of fighting between crusaders and various Sultans/kingdoms that no longer existed.

The wisdom of firmly establishing a new nation can be absolutely debated but it was an area very and truly up for grabs with a very eclectic mix of Muslims, Christians, Druze, etc collectively from 5-6 neighboring countries/kingdoms which has been now distilled into this idea of a Muslim Palestinian, like those that reside in Gaza or West Bank, that had always been sourced there.

And while the Balfour Declaration accelerated it, Jewish migration back to the area had been going on for 100 years from Europe and the Middle East, especially when pogroms occurred in Russia.  Part of the reason why an alternate Jewish territory in the US/Canada or Australia made no sense to me

Which is why the only option now is to make the best of the world as it is, not as it should be. Two state solution. With heavy investment into Gaza and a Palestinian state to insure they don't just survive, but thrive.

I don't disagree.  And I fully support that as well.  But people need to be honest about this and what they actually support.  Just as a two state solution shouldn't have outsized Jewish influence or control, people aren't being honest about what they think "Free Palestine" really means.

"Free Palestine" with a removal of Israeli occupation/blockades/control?  Sure definitely.  But if you're chanting or tweeting stuff like "From the river to the sea" you're advocating for the dissolution/destruction of Israel.   Nor the idea that a free Palestine with self determination can fight for what they feel is rightfully theirs which just gets us back to the 60s.

There are plenty of sensible pro-Palestinian advocates who just want freedom and a better life for Palestinians.  But there are many many who make it very clear that they don't agree with or respect Israel's existence or presence in the region.  I'm not even calling them anti-Semitic but dishonest about what they actually want for the region.

[The Sultan]

But neither did anyone who would have wanted to claim it. The Ottomans had it 400 years.  The few hundred years before that been a collection of fighting between crusaders and various Sultans/kingdoms that no longer existed.

I mean, I think the people who lived there wanted to claim it.

[brewcity77]

I don't disagree.  And I fully support that as well.  But people need to be honest about this and what they actually support.  Just as a two state solution shouldn't have outsized Jewish influence or control, people aren't being honest about what they think "Free Palestine" really means.

"Free Palestine" with a removal of Israeli occupation/blockades/control?  Sure definitely.  But if you're chanting or tweeting stuff like "From the river to the sea" you're advocating for the dissolution/destruction of Israel.   Nor the idea that a free Palestine with self determination can fight for what they feel is rightfully theirs which just gets us back to the 60s.

There are plenty of sensible pro-Palestinian advocates who just want freedom and a better life for Palestinians.  But there are many many who make it very clear that they don't agree with or respect Israel's existence or presence in the region.  I'm not even calling them anti-Semitic but dishonest about what they actually want for the region.

Agree with all of this. I want a Jewish homeland, but not at the expense of a Palestinian homeland for the families that have been there for generations. And vice versa. Obviously peace is the hardest solution, but in 1941 the idea of the Allies not just winning but turning around and rebuilding Germany and Japan likely seemed just as unlikely.

[Lennys Tap]

Because that is flawed thinking born out by generations of matching violence with violence. Give them the opportunity to thrive, like we did with Germany and Japan, and they will thrive. Give them hate and they will revisit that hate on you.

We gave Germany and Japan the opportunity to thrive only after we matched their violence with our violence and then some. We brought them to their knees, they surrendered and we stationed soldiers throughout their borders while denying them the ability to defend themselves except through us. After a couple of generations enough of  the cancer that dominated their societies was in remission and they did indeed thrive. As long as Hamas, Hezbollah and other groups that want a Jewish "solution" that matches Hitler's hold sway in the Mideast the idea of peace is a pipe dream. Crush them and deprogram the Palestinian populace for a couple of generations and there's a chance. But until the cancer is removed there's no hope of that.

[MuggsyB]

We gave Germany and Japan the opportunity to thrive only after we matched their violence with our violence and then some. We brought them to their knees, they surrendered and we stationed soldiers throughout their borders while denying them the ability to defend themselves except through us. After a couple of generations enough of  the cancer that dominated their societies was in remission and they did indeed thrive. As long as Hamas, Hezbollah and other groups that want a Jewish "solution" that matches Hitler's hold sway in the Mideast the idea of peace is a pipe dream. Crush them and deprogram the Palestinian populace for a couple of generations and there's a chance. But until the cancer is removed there's no hope of that.

Lenny,

This isn't important to Brew.  Pay attention Lenny because this is mariana trench deep:  He "wants a Jewish homeland, but not at the expense of the Palestinians".  If somehow Netanyahu and the IDF can heed Brew's advice, not a single soul will perish.  Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and Iran's Supreme Leader will all celebrate Hanukkah and go to a Seder with the families of those murdered and members of the Israeli Knesset. 

[Hards Alumni]

Lenny,

This isn't important to Brew.  Pay attention Lenny because this is mariana trench deep:  He "wants a Jewish homeland, but not at the expense of the Palestinians".  If somehow Netanyahu and the IDF can heed Brew's advice, not a single soul will perish.  Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and Iran's Supreme Leader will all celebrate Hanukkah and go to a Seder with the families of those murdered and members of the Israeli Knesset.

I'll say one thing about you Muggs, I'm proud that you've taken such an interest in learning about Judaism in the last week.  Perhaps by the end of the month you'll be reciting the Torah in Hebrew.  Shalom, brother.

[MU82]

Column by the NYT's Bret Stephens, headlined: Hamas Bears the Blame for Every Death in This War:

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/15/opinion/hamas-war-israel-gaza.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20231016&instance_id=105310&nl=the-morning&regi_id=108420427&segment_id=147448&te=1&user_id=d36dcf821462fdd16ec3636710a855fa

Includes this 3-paragraph passage:

Consider: Hamas launched an attack with a wantonness like what the Nazis showed at Babyn Yar or ISIS at Sinjar. It did so knowing that it would provoke the most furious Israeli response possible. Why put millions of Palestinians at risk? Because Hamas has learned that it profits at least as much from Palestinian deaths as it does from Israeli ones — the more of each, the better.

Murdering Jews is an end in its own right for Hamas, because it believes it fulfills a theological aim. The original Hamas covenant invokes this injunction: "The Day of Judgment will not come about until Muslims fight Jews and kill them. Then, the Jews will hide behind rocks and trees, and the rocks and trees will cry out: 'O Muslim, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him.'" Hamas later softened the language from "Jews" to "Zionists" and "kill" to "resisting the occupation with all means and methods," but the meaning is the same.

Hamas also achieves practical and propagandistic goals by putting Palestinians in harm's way. More civilians in combat zones mean more human shields for its forces. More dead and wounded Palestinians mean more sympathy for its side and more condemnation of Israel.

[MuggsyB]

Column by the NYT's Bret Stephens, headlined: Hamas Bears the Blame for Every Death in This War:

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/15/opinion/hamas-war-israel-gaza.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20231016&instance_id=105310&nl=the-morning&regi_id=108420427&segment_id=147448&te=1&user_id=d36dcf821462fdd16ec3636710a855fa

Includes this 3-paragraph passage:

Consider: Hamas launched an attack with a wantonness like what the Nazis showed at Babyn Yar or ISIS at Sinjar. It did so knowing that it would provoke the most furious Israeli response possible. Why put millions of Palestinians at risk? Because Hamas has learned that it profits at least as much from Palestinian deaths as it does from Israeli ones — the more of each, the better.

Murdering Jews is an end in its own right for Hamas, because it believes it fulfills a theological aim. The original Hamas covenant invokes this injunction: "The Day of Judgment will not come about until Muslims fight Jews and kill them. Then, the Jews will hide behind rocks and trees, and the rocks and trees will cry out: 'O Muslim, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him.'" Hamas later softened the language from "Jews" to "Zionists" and "kill" to "resisting the occupation with all means and methods," but the meaning is the same.

Hamas also achieves practical and propagandistic goals by putting Palestinians in harm's way. More civilians in combat zones mean more human shields for its forces. More dead and wounded Palestinians mean more sympathy for its side and more condemnation of Israel.

Did you see what Omar posted on X?   Beyond belief.  Even for her. 

[The Sultan]

Did you see what Omar posted on X?   Beyond belief.  Even for her. 

Nope. Never paid attention before. Not going to do so now.

[Uncle Rico]

Nope. Never paid attention before. Not going to do so now.

She said we should wage an illegal war against our enemies in the Middle East without any care for human life

[Pakuni]

Did you see what Omar posted on X?   Beyond belief.  Even for her.

What were told to be outraged about now?

Also, where do I stand?

[tower912]

She also wants to turn Iran into a parking lot for no reason other than bloodlust?   What a coincidence.

[4everwarriors]

https://youtu.be/RpbJbOiIUS8?si=T-Cir5E45aI16zfD, hey?

[4everwarriors]

Reports: Hamas Kills Palestinian Civilians Trying to Flee; Won't Let Americans Leave, hey?

[Uncle Rico]

Reports: Hamas Kills Palestinian Civilians Trying to Flee; Won't Let Americans Leave, hey?

Yes, Hamas is evil and Israel's response, including ground troops is a warranted and necessary response

[MU82]

Did you see what Omar posted on X?   Beyond belief.  Even for her.

I didn't. I don't use the twits, a cesspool for antisemitism. I'm surprised you support it.

[forgetful]

Reports: Hamas Kills Palestinian Civilians Trying to Flee; Won't Let Americans Leave, hey?

Egypt said the problem with Americans leaving is damage on the other side. Some American outlets say Hamas won't let them leave. American's in Gaza say that the problem is the border is still closed on the Egyptian side.

The damage on the other side is known to be caused by Israeli bombing.

So no idea who is responsible for Americans not being able to leave by the only exit left in the country.

[reinko]

Report: Bigot in Illinois stabs and kills Muslim child 20+ times because he fears they are coming to take his country away.