Does the USA need to STOP supporting ISRAEL NOW-?

[thomasdixon]

The USA has looked the other way while Israelis murder Palestinian children

The USA has looked the other way while Israelis destroy Palestinian fishing boats.

The USA has looked the other way while Israelis murder American citizens.

The USA has looked the other way while Israelis destroy Palestinian villages and then build illegally on top of the rubble.

28 Dec 2022
Benjamin Netanyahu’s incoming hardline government put West Bank settlement expansion at the top of its list of priorities on Wednesday, vowing to legalise dozens of illegally built outposts and annex the occupied territory as part of its coalition deal with its ultranational allies.
Netanyahu government makes West Bank settlement expansion its priority

We, as Americans, including American Jews must band together and demand that we, citizens of America STOP giving Israel money.
We must make our voices heard in Congress and directly to Biden.

Israel should be designated a terrorist state-?

opinions welcome yes/no/why

[Athetotheist]

Maybe Israel's neighbors would have better feelings toward Israel if Israel would go away and leave them alone.

Go where?

Uhh.....back to Israel.

[historia]

Maybe Israel's neighbors would have better feelings toward Israel if Israel would go away and leave them alone.

Go where?

Uhh.....back to Israel.

That's where they started in 1948. Their Arab neighbors attacked them. Twice.

Surely you know this, yeah?

[oldbadger]

Israel was not a place of wealthy Arabian societies who lived prosperously and lively in Israel, It was just a place where there was no crops, no grazing lands, no oil, no resources and no trade...

Arabian Government, who were associated with wealthy land owners and resource developers claimed to have owned the land and they were paid enormous amounts of cash by Jews and the Arabians they took the money and agreed to sell the land and a very top price...

Israel agreed to allow Arabs who did not want to leave to live in a nearby settlement and have business, friendship and work together with nearby Arabian families but this is not the way of Islam.

Islam demands that the Muslims must dominate over the Jew

the nearby Arabian communities simply fled and ran away from their homes because they were convinced that the Arabian Government Military would attack the Jews and they were running away from the battlefield to a safe location until the attack was completed - -

after the attacks the Jews who allowed Arabs to come near their borders were being terrorized and attacked and shot at by civilian Arabs who would one day present themselves as peaceful neighbors and then suddenly set off a bomb, shoot with sniper rifles at Jewish women and children, suddenly attack and then suddenly go back to presenting themselves as peaceful neighbors

this is not neighbor that you allow near your home

Are you trying to find excuses for the upheaval of Palestinians from West Bank, the razing of Gaza, the deliberate killing of Muslims across Gaza or the Israeli government's clear intentions to evict Muslims from Gaza?

Outrageous! Criminal!

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to historia in post #62]

That's where they started in 1948. Their Arab neighbors attacked them. Twice.

Surely you know this, yeah?

So you think they'll be attacked for ending their decades-long occupation of their neighbors' land?

[historia]

That's where they started in 1948. Their Arab neighbors attacked them. Twice.

Surely you know this, yeah?

So you think they'll be attacked for ending their decades-long occupation of their neighbors' land?

They'll be attacked because Iran and its regional proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas (both of which directly border Israel), have as their stated goal the complete destruction of the state of Israel. They are explicit about this.

If the Israelis were foolish enough to retreat to the 1947 green line, they would be putting themselves in an indefensible position -- one from which they have already been attacked twice by multiple Arab armies.

You've been writing in this thread as if the Israelis just woke up one day and out of the blue decided to occupy their neighbors' lands -- and, if only they would stop, everything would be hunky-dory. Surely you are not so ignorant of history as to be that naive.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to historia in post #65]

If the Israelis were foolish enough to retreat to the 1947 green line, they would be putting themselves in an indefensible position -- one from which they have already been attacked twice by multiple Arab armies.

Are you suggesting that the modern state of Israel was founded with a built-in right to move aggressively into the territory of its neighbors?

"The biggest change to Israel's frontiers came in 1967, when the conflict known as the Six Day War left Israel in occupation of the Sinai peninsula, the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, East Jerusalem and most of the Syrian Golan Heights - effectively tripling the size of territory under Israel's control. Israel effectively annexed East Jerusalem - claiming the whole of the city as its capital - and the Golan Heights."
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-54116567

As Noam Chomsky put it, Israel had a choice between expansion and security and chose expansion.

You've been writing in this thread as if the Israelis just woke up one day and out of the blue decided to occupy their neighbors' lands

It doesn't matter how long it took to make the decision; it's what they've been doing.

and, if only they would stop, everything would be hunky-dory.

It would certainly be a sensible place to start, wouldn't it?

[historia]

If the Israelis were foolish enough to retreat to the 1947 green line, they would be putting themselves in an indefensible position -- one from which they have already been attacked twice by multiple Arab armies.

Are you suggesting that the modern state of Israel was founded with a built-in right to move aggressively into the territory of its neighbors?

I don't think it makes sense to talk about nations having "rights." That also goes for those who say Israel has a "right" to exist. Political entities don't have rights.

That being said, wars have consequences. If you launch a war against a neighboring state, you have to live with the consequences of initiating that conflict, including the potential loss of your own territory that can, and often does, result if you lose.

Jordon, Egypt, and Syria started and lost multiple wars against the state of Israel in its early decades. The unfortunate people living in the Gaza strip today are dealing with the consequences of those terrible decisions on the part of Arab leaders.

As Noam Chomsky put it, Israel had a choice between expansion and security and chose expansion.

I think that's a false dichotomy, and, frankly, I don't care what Chomsky has to say.

You've been writing in this thread as if the Israelis just woke up one day and out of the blue decided to occupy their neighbors' lands

It doesn't matter how long it took to make the decision; it's what they've been doing.

My comment here is not about what has happened, or how long it took to happen, but about why it happened, which is wholly missing from your analysis so far in this thread.

and, if only they would stop, everything would be hunky-dory.

It would certainly be a sensible place to start, wouldn't it?

The Israelis have already tried this. In 2005, Israel removed all of its soldiers and forcibly evacuated all of its settlers from Gaza, and gave political control over the Gaza strip to its inhabitants. Once they were finally "left alone," as you put it, surely Gaza's democratically-elected political leadership decided to live in peace with Israel, right?

Except they didn't. They declared their goal was the complete destruction of Israel, and devoted the lion's share of their resources -- including diverting international humanitarian aid -- to achieving that goal.

We got to where we are now because at least some segment of Israel's neighbors from 1948 until today have wanted to wipe it off the face of the map. Until that stops -- and, let's be clear, there are important leaders in the Arab world who want that to stop -- the Israelis cannot sensibly go back to an indefensible position, as you would have them do.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to historia in post #67]

I don't think it makes sense to talk about nations having "rights." That also goes for those who say Israel has a "right" to exist. Political entities don't have rights.

That being said, wars have consequences. If you launch a war against a neighboring state, you have to live with the consequences of initiating that conflict, including the potential loss of your own territory that can, and often does, result if you lose.

Are you saying that there's no such thing as a war crime?
https://jewishcurrents.org/a-textbook-case-of-genocide

Jordon, Egypt, and Syria started and lost multiple wars against the state of Israel in its early decades. The unfortunate people living in the Gaza strip today are dealing with the consequences of those terrible decisions on the part of Arab leaders.

The people living in the Gaza strip today are dealing with the consequences of what the IDF is doing to them today.

As Noam Chomsky put it, Israel had a choice between expansion and security and chose expansion.

I think that's a false dichotomy

False dichotomy? Israel's expansion hasn't gotten it much security, has it?

My comment here is not about what has happened, or how long it took to happen, but about why it happened, which is wholly missing from your analysis so far in this thread.

Why it happened is fairly clear. Israel wants the land the Palestinians are on.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1j5954edlno

(from the article)
"strategic move that prevents the establishment of a Palestinian state that would endanger Israel, and serves as a buffer against our enemies."

Using settlers as "a buffer against our enemies" sounds to me an awful lot like using civilians as human shields, the very thing Hamas is routinely accused of doing.

In 2005, Israel removed all of its soldiers and forcibly evacuated all of its settlers from Gaza, and gave political control over the Gaza strip to its inhabitants.

"Israel’s disengagement from Gaza in 2005, unilateral withdrawal of all Israeli security forces and settlements from the Gaza Strip in August–September 2005. The withdrawal also included the evacuation of four Israeli settlements in the West Bank, but the vast majority of settlements in the West Bank remained unaffected."
https://www.britannica.com/event/Israel ... -from-Gaza

"According to the 2005 amendment to the Basic Law, the 2006 election was a mixed majority and proportional representation system. This resulted in the controversial outcome of Hamas winning 74 seats although it received 44 percent of the vote"
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Palestinian-Authority

We got to where we are now because at least some segment of Israel's neighbors from 1948 until today have wanted to wipe it off the face of the map. Until that stops -- and, let's be clear, there are important leaders in the Arab world who want that to stop -- the Israelis cannot sensibly go back to an indefensible position, as you would have them do.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/20 ... testament/

What was that you were saying about an "indefensible position"?

[historia]

That being said, wars have consequences. If you launch a war against a neighboring state, you have to live with the consequences of initiating that conflict, including the potential loss of your own territory that can, and often does, result if you lose.

Are you saying that there's no such thing as a war crime?

No, that's a straw man argument.

Jordon, Egypt, and Syria started and lost multiple wars against the state of Israel in its early decades. The unfortunate people living in the Gaza strip today are dealing with the consequences of those terrible decisions on the part of Arab leaders.

The people living in the Gaza strip today are dealing with the consequences of what the IDF is doing to them today.

Sure, in the same way that, if I start hitting you in the face and then you hit me back in order to get me to stop attacking you, I'm now dealing with the consequences of your punch.

Now, imagine a bunch of people on the Internet complaining that you hit me, arguing that we wouldn't be fighting at all if you had not hit me, and you'll start to appreciate why ignoring the full history of a conflict and focusing just on the most recent events is a problem.

As Noam Chomsky put it, Israel had a choice between expansion and security and chose expansion.

I think that's a false dichotomy

False dichotomy? Israel's expansion hasn't gotten it much security, has it?

Yes, it has.

Over the past decade, look at how many rockets and mortars have been fired into Israel from Lebanon and the Gaza strip, two areas the Israelis do not control. It numbers in the thousands.

By contrast, how many have been fired from the West Bank? Very few, because Israel controls that area.

The Israelis have, amazingly, been able to intercept most of the rockets fired from Lebanon and Gaza. It would be very difficult for them to do the same for rockets fired from the West Bank. Controlling the West Bank, then, improves Israel's security.

My comment here is not about what has happened, or how long it took to happen, but about why it happened, which is wholly missing from your analysis so far in this thread.

Why it happened is fairly clear. Israel wants the land the Palestinians are on.

If it was that simple, then why did the Israelis repeatedly agree to several very generous peace deals with the Palestinians from the late 1940s through the early 2000s that would have given the Palestinians their own state in the West Bank and Gaza?

If your approach to understanding the Israel-Palestine conflict is to just look at the events of the past couple years, while ignoring the previous five decades that lead to the current status quo, you're going to end up with a very shallow understanding of this topic, as evidenced by the above comment.

In 2005, Israel removed all of its soldiers and forcibly evacuated all of its settlers from Gaza, and gave political control over the Gaza strip to its inhabitants.

"Israel’s disengagement from Gaza in 2005, unilateral withdrawal of all Israeli security forces and settlements from the Gaza Strip in August–September 2005. The withdrawal also included the evacuation of four Israeli settlements in the West Bank, but the vast majority of settlements in the West Bank remained unaffected."

Yes, the Gaza strip is not the West Bank. If anyone was somehow confused on that point, hopefully they are no longer.

But this doesn't address my point: Israel giving back control of the Gaza strip to the Palestinians did not cause the new government in Gaza to seek peace with Israel.

As Noam Chomsky put it

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/20 ... testament/

[Youtube video from Turkish state media]

You really must consult better sources.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to historia in post #69]

Sure, in the same way that, if I hit you in the face a bunch of times and then you hit me back in order to get me to stop hitting you in the face, I'm now dealing with the consequences of your punch.

What if you were hitting me in the face because I had invaded your house, refusing to leave and inviting my relatives to move in and take over more and more of your house?

Now, imagine a bunch of people on the Internet complaining that you hit me and arguing that we wouldn't be fighting at all if you had not hit me, and you'll start to appreciate why ignoring the past and focusing just on the most recent events is a problem.

We certainly mustn't focus only on the present and ignore the past (look up Nakba).

Over the past decade, look at how many rockets and mortars have been fired into Israel from Lebanon and the Gaza strip, two areas the Israelis do not control. It numbers in the thousands.

How many have been fired from the West Bank? Almost none, because Israel controls that area.

Israel doesn't just control that area----it colonizes that area.

The Israelis have, amazingly, been able to intercept most of the rockets fired from Lebanon and Gaza. It would be very difficult for them to do the same for rockets fired from the West Bank. Controlling the West Bank, then, improves Israel's security.

Sure, because why de-escalate resentment by removing illegal settlements from someone else's territory when you can just keep them under your thumb.....right?
https://apnews.com/article/water-climat ... 6b992b5b42

If it was that simple, then why did the Israelis repeatedly agree to several very generous peace deals with the Palestinians from the late 1940s through the early 2000s that would have given the Palestinians their own state in the West Bank and Gaza?

It's been far more complicated than that----and there's plenty of blame to go around.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/two-state-solution


"Israel’s disengagement from Gaza in 2005, unilateral withdrawal of all Israeli security forces and settlements from the Gaza Strip in August–September 2005. The withdrawal also included the evacuation of four Israeli settlements in the West Bank, but the vast majority of settlements in the West Bank remained unaffected."

Yes, the Gaza strip is not the West Bank. If anyone was somehow confused on that point, hopefully they are no longer.

Yes, the West Bank is still under illegal occupation. If you were somehow confused on that point, hopefully you are no longer.

As Noam Chomsky put it

Chomsky is Jewish.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/20 ... testament/

You didn't read the article?

[Youtube video from Turkish state media]

Are the people in the video Turks.....or are they Jews?