Yes, I thought so. Stay safe mate. I value your input here.
Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
youre defending apartheid. whats wrong with you?
It all boils down to the same thing - not every Palestinian is in Hamas nor a supporter. Not every Irish person was in the IRA nor a supporter.
one fact is true, what Israel might feel is the right thing for them today will come back to haunt them in the following decades. History of conflicts have taught us this
That has absolutely nothing to do with anything I said.
The staff at the hospitals and UN schools that israel have bomb are at fault right?
whats wrong with you?
Don't worry, the Israeli electorate will vote those right wingers back in at the next election.
Feck me, this is mildly exciting news in times like this.
I wish I shared this assumption.
my guess is that they will have likely expanded the government,
and possibly made Ben Gvir and Smotrich feck off from the Security Cabinet....
But you'd assume it'll be all over the news if they were to be kicked out of the government entirely.
who can hope.
So Israel is a terrorist country.
I get the analogy you're trying to make, but the calculus was simply different. Had all of the IRA been stuck in Belfast unable to escape and they'd just rolled into London and killed 1200+, you could viably have seen a siege of the city. It wouldn't have looked the same as there were far less of them and they didn't have heavy weaponry, but it would have been brutal. Look at Afghanistan and Iraq. Places far away, but still.
Let's not get carried away here. The people in Gaza and those there on humanitarian grounds are not at fault for anything.
I was actually going to write something about our apartheid (South Africa), Mandela being branded a terrorist etc. and what you can eventually expect when you oppress & dehumanize people long enough...in here yesterday, but thought against it. Because i realise i'd have accusations of whataboutism thrown my way, or even worse "trying to justify" what hamas did. And in the end, it won't matter a thing to anyone anyway.Only after decades of branding the ANC as terrorists (Mandela was taken off the list in 2008) and recognizing the right of the Afrikaner regime to defend themselves, until the end of the Cold War
Nope. Their careers are all but over.
In Israel, there are de facto only central or right-leaning parties. the left side of the map has become insignificant.
a more sane and "moderate" centric-right government will likely be elected, and for the Palestinians, nothing is going to change.
Nobody gives a shit about their fate so long as they keep quiet over there in the WB or Gaza and leave Israel alone.
a treaty with the Saudis can't ever be signed after what Gaza will turn into.
so no one is going to force the Israeli government's hand into even pretending it seeks to promote a 2-states solution.
Precisely.
Said everyone in reference to Bibi about 15 years ago.
The electorate can't get enough of these right-wing fanatics.
Syria. Lebanon/Hezbollah. They remain significant threats. And Iran of course although they're neither Arab nor neighbouring, they are the biggest existential threat to Israel.
You refuted a poster who was saying when does an aggressor ever not take advantage if they are the stronger force and made a sarcastic comment about how:
When in fact the Allies did more than control Germany's borders, they erased it as a country, split it into four and pillaged it.
Thanks! I'm fine though, far out of the mix now.
How am I defending apartheid? I'm simply saying the situation is not analogous to the SA one.
The UN is at fault for their staffers getting killed in indiscriminate bombings by Israel. Got it.
The issue is protests usually amount to nothing (remember the Iraq war million man march?), and the media has also largely decided to run with a certain narrative at the behest of their editors. Ultimately its the Western governments who hold the cards, and they've opted to favour an unequivocal commitment to indulging the Israelis, even at the expense of Palestinian suffering, going as far as to veto anything, including something as innocuous as a UNSC resolution condemning illegal settlements. So its no wonder Israel believes it can carry out acting with impunity as their actions bear no diplomatic or economic consequences.
Looks like some students deserve to have their future prospects destroyed.
I meant Smotrich and Ben Gvir.
Bibi, he's like a wizard, a **** leader. he can convince his followers that the earth is in the shape of a triangled zebra.
I hope he dies somehow, assassination, heart failure, don't care.
He is more of a danger to me and my friends than Ichyie Sinwar as far as I'm concerned.
So did I with my original comment. They'll all be voted back in the second they're running for office again.
I don't know where you are getting your articles from. They are wrong.
Here's a rough timeline of Apartheid in South Africa:
The movement starts peaceful
The Afrikaner regime clamps down hard on peaceful dissent with imprisonment and extrajudicial killings
A decision is made by the ANC to introduce armed struggle, initially focused on economic sabotage
Mandela and others go abroad for military training
Mandela and others are caught, sham trialed and sentenced to life imprisonment on Robben Island. Others move abroad to forward bases in Zambia/Mozambique/Zimbabwe once their minority/colonial governments fell, for planning and incursions against Apartheid troops
Meanwhile the majority black population in South Africa gradually make the interior ungovernable with violent resistance
Extrajudicial killings and imprisonment is heightened by the government, and ultimately an indefinite state of emergency is proclaimed, drafting many Afrikaners into military and intelligence to fight at home and abroad
Faced with the mounting costs of fighting at home and abroad, coupled with a loss of support from the West due to the end of the Cold War, De Klerk releases Mandela
De Klerk asks Mandela to renounce violence from his end as a precondition to negotiations. Mandela refuses, saying that the state needs to ramp off Apartheid first
The state looks to instigate "black on black" violence and destabilize free elections by infiltrating the ANC and IFP and trying to turn them against each other which works with limited success. Chris Hani is killed by an apartheid extremist.
Elections take place on 1994, and Mandela is ushered in as president.
The movement started peaceful in the 1940s/1950s. And the government responded with violence. And from that moment, until the eve of free elections, the resistance against Apartheid was violent.
Again, change your reading. Especially if your source is an Israeli website.
The Afrikaner regime clamps down hard on peaceful dissent with imprisonment and extrajudicial killings
A decision is made by the ANC to introduce armed struggle, initially focused on economic sabotage
Mandela and others go abroad for military training
Mandela and others are caught, sham trialed and sentenced to life imprisonment on Robben Island. Others move abroad to forward bases in Zambia/Mozambique/Zimbabwe once their minority/colonial governments fell, for planning and incursions against Apartheid troops
Meanwhile the majority black population in South Africa gradually make the interior ungovernable with violent resistance
Extrajudicial killings and imprisonment is heightened by the government, and ultimately an indefinite state of emergency is proclaimed, drafting many Afrikaners into military and intelligence to fight at home and abroad
Faced with the mounting costs of fighting at home and abroad, coupled with a loss of support from the West due to the end of the Cold War, De Klerk releases Mandela
De Klerk asks Mandela to renounce violence from his end as a precondition to negotiations. Mandela refuses, saying that the state needs to ramp off Apartheid first
The state looks to instigate "black on black" violence and destabilize free elections by infiltrating the ANC and IFP and trying to turn them against each other which works with limited success. Chris Hani is killed by an apartheid extremist.
Elections take place on 1994, and Mandela is ushered in as president.
The movement started peaceful in the 1940s/1950s. And the government responded with violence. And from that moment, until the eve of free elections, the resistance against Apartheid was violent.
Again, change your reading. Especially if your source is an Israeli website.
Syria can barely keep their country together and have been devastated by a decade long civil war. Hezbollah are a militia. Iran have historically never invaded a nation since the days of the Persian Empire, and for all their evils they aren't as stupid to not realise that directly attacking nuclear Israel would lead to their own existential demise. Israel as a nuclear power with the US as its main ally are pretty much bulletproof.
But all of this is immaterial since it still doesn't explain why Israel hasn't declared its borders or ceased expanding settlements.
I've been in the museum in Joburg too many times mate. And I'm not an expert but still
Somewhat accurate until 1900 then it goes off the rails
Yeah, I don't even think you need to be any sort of expert - just a high level of understanding and it will make sense.I've been in the museum in Joburg too many times mate. And I'm not an expert but still
North Korea and South Korea co-exist with a guardened border between them. Could this serve as a template for a future 2-state solution?
(Yes I know people are saying the 2 state solution is dead but I'm not convinced)
(Yes I know people are saying the 2 state solution is dead but I'm not convinced)
I'm used to being the pessimistic one. hope you're wrong.
Feck me that's bleak. Accurate, but bleak.
They aren't at fault for sure. They are doing good work. But their managers and administrators are. I can't imagine why you'd leave your staff vulnerable in a city under siege, in the same way they were withdrawn from Mariupol and Bakhmut. It was clearly about to become a high intensity war zone.
West Germany was a fully democratic country that had control over themselves and their movement after 1955. If you honestly cannot see the difference between Germany post 1955 and Palestine now, and still want to equate them as the same or even similar in any way, I have to doubt your intentions or intelligence.
Thanks mate. Yes, and also there is this famous video from 2020 Tehran right after Trump sent Suleimani to hell to burn eternally....The public refused to walk on Israeli/US flags and the few regime supporters who did it were massively booed and told at: Here is the video: (btw, how do we attach now that Twitter is X?)
https://x.com/emilyshar1/status/1710881841211638203?s=20
Also these were some of the photos of Iranians at Israel-support rally in Toronto (I'd hazard there were 200-300 Iranians there at least)
No, unless Israel behave like a country that has borders. And also no because no one will enforce any misconduct from Israel. I shared the article yesterday but these paragraphs point the finger at a fundamental issue and an issue that is still swept under the carpet.
Increasingly looking like the beheaded babies story may have been correct. Just beyond horrific.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
You’re moving purposefully away from what you said and this is a weak response. Attempting to say I compared Palestine to West Germany is poor form, clearly dispelled by simply looking at the post exchange. The ending to your post is somewhat ironic.
Would prefer to see a direct quote confirming a contentious story and obviously hoping it's not true.
All of the UK media sites who led on it seem to have pulled it, except the DM of course, and only US and Israeli sites still running it from a cursory search.
EDIT: There's no number of victims mentioned either.