International 248 people, 66 children Palestinian dead after "Apartheid state" Israel launches airstrikes in Gaza

[meauneau]

I see what you're doing..
I can spot a difference between Hamas and the Palestinians. One is a terrorist/terrorist org and the other is a Palestinian.
Are you able to distinguish a normal Israeli and the oppressor of that same origin or are they the same to you?
They all think alike and act alike?

I think we can agree on this. Israel is a terrorist state, but not all Israelis are terrorists or supporters of terrorism. Hamas is a terrorist org but not all Palestinians are terrorists or supporters of terrorism.

You're also a walking, talking, double-standard and everything you claim as righteous to the Palestinians or actually to Hamas, since that was the topic here, can be said about the Israelians/IDF.
They were to be overrun by their neighbours, so they fought and won. Then there was a few million Palestinians that got driven out and since then there has been multiple offers on the table from Israel, negotiated with the help of the international community.
The PLO and Hamas won't take a compromise so they get nothing and the offer gets reduced each time.

A compromise is the only solution. Otherwise it's jack shit and shanty towns.

Nah you can justify israeli terrorism by appealing to the fact that some foreign countries went to war with them. Israel will never negotiate in any terms that won't give full advantage to Israel. We have seen it again and again. Every time israel doesn't get what it wants it uses its superior military power to terrorise Palestinian into submission. Same thing is happening now with Sheikh Jarrah and the consequent terrorist attack by israel on innocent and unarmed worshippers in al Aqsa mosque. You cannot seriously be justifying terrorism. I hope you are not.

 

[Voodoo_Child906]

Uh sure I never denied that and I even mentioned its how communities were organized in the premodern period. But Jews in Palestine were nothing like what you would call a nation in the modern sense of the word hence why the Zionist movement started in Europe and was exported to the region and didn't grow organically from the native Jewish community.

Nation no, but they were a distinct identity and not lumped in with the the Levantine Muslim\Arab majority that considered them Dhimmi.

I may have misunderstood your initial post:

Me: "Where did I say that? They certainly were a distinct group, they were Levantine Arabs along with the modern day Jordainians, Syrians and Lebanese."
You: "So were the Jews of the region."

Are you saying the Jews were a distinct group or that they were Levantine Arabs as well?

 

[meauneau]

Concession accepted on the matter of Iran being my enemy.

Of course, in your mind it is your "enemy" because some people chant death to America.

When we look a the facts we can see that America has been and is still destroying lives for it's own selfish and greedy benefit.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Nation no, but they were a distinct identity and not lumped in with the the Levantine Muslim\Arab majority that considered them Dhimmi.

I may have misunderstood your initial post:

Me: "Where did I say that? They certainly were a distinct group, they were Levantine Arabs along with the modern day Jordainians, Syrians and Lebanese."
You: "So were the Jews of the region."

Are you saying the Jews were a distinct group or that they were Levantine Arabs as well?

Under your logic they were Levantine Arabs, they just happened to be Jewish Levantine Arabs.

You're trying to have your cake and eat it too and everyone can see it.

 

[Voodoo_Child906]

Under your logic they were Levantine Arabs, they just happened to be Jewish Levantine Arabs.

You're trying to have your cake and eat it too and everyone can see it.

Umm no they were not, they were Levantine Jews as they were distinct and regarded as Dhimmi.

 

[fishNjits]

It does and if you read the Talmud you will see how it paints a supremacist picture of Jews. Everything else is inferior to Jews, we are like animals. This is what they are taught.

This is a lie and not what we are taught. This is a blatant anti-Semitic slur.

 

[Proud American]

This is a lie and not what we are taught. This is a blatant anti-Semitic slur.

Ben Shapiro is very open about the Talmudic teachings. He’s ok with them, and everyone else thinks it’s kinda extremely hostile

 

[Islam Imamate]

Umm no they were not, they were Levantine Jews as they were distinct and regarded as Dhimmi.

Being a Jew and being an Arab are not mutually exclusive. Hebrew was only revived as the daily language of Jews through the Zionist movement, in the premodern period they spoke Arabic and were otherwise indistinguishable from other Arabs except for religious identity markers. According to your logic they were all Levantine Arabs who were communally organized along religious lines whether that religion was Islam, Judaism, or Christianity.

The Druze were by far the most distinctive religious group and the one that could've reasonably made a claim to being a nation since they mostly lived together in a geographically contiguous area(Mount Druze) apart from the other religious groups and were often the most staunchly independent of the central state. The native Jews tended to live alongside their Christian and Muslim neighbors, at most organizing themselves into their own city quarters or villages.

 

[meauneau]

This is a lie and not what we are taught. This is a blatant anti-Semitic slur.

What does "anti-Semitic" even mean? When I call the state of israel a terrorist state they say I am anti-Semitic, when I critique the religion I am anti-Semitic, when I criticise the practice of sucking the blood off of a baby's penis I am anti-Semitic.

It has lost it's meaning.

I can post passages from the talmud if you want.

 

[SanchoMF]

I think we can agree on this. Israel is a terrorist state, but not all Israelis are terrorists or supporters of terrorism. Hamas is a terrorist org but not all Palestinians are terrorists or supporters of terrorism.

Nah you can justify israeli terrorism by appealing to the fact that some foreign countries went to war with them. Israel will never negotiate in any terms that won't give full advantage to Israel. We have seen it again and again. Every time israel doesn't get what it wants it uses its superior military power to terrorise Palestinian into submission. Same thing is happening now with Sheikh Jarrah and the consequent terrorist attack by israel on innocent and unarmed worshippers in al Aqsa mosque. You cannot seriously be justifying terrorism. I hope you are not.

Self-defence excuse won't take you far, because especially in this case every party has a case or doesn't have a case.
Saying that the existence of Hamas and their actions are justified, it's all the same for the Israel security forces and what they carry out : Event of violence and the threat for it to escalate more must be neutralised or an act must be retaliated, in any instance you can just switch sides and say that they started it. Nothing positive will come out of this and people will die but if that's what people want, then I'm sure they can have plenty more of that.

Until today, the majority of the lands belong to Israel (according to international law) so they are the party that are putting up the parts to be annexed to Palestine : there is no other trade apart from peace, so one side has all to gain and nothing to lose.
I'm sure people aren't happy with a compromise but it's all there is. It's that or business as usual.

 

[A Lurker]

I'm beginning to think @Madmick covets the worst mod award with his weapons grade shithousery in this thread.

Its a very complex issue with a tragic history where blame is easy to throw around on both sides; but the basic fact is that stolen land is stolen land.

 

[helltoupee]

It's humorous that people trot out the same hackneyed arguments again and again rather than focus on the table set before them.

Hate the Jews? Hate Israel? Hate their government and its expansions? Fine. Advocate for a peaceful resolution that favors Palestine. Advocate for resolutions that threaten sanctions or even force against Israel by a collective of governments in places like the U.N.

Hamas did not. They provoked a war.

So don't seek for the world to pity them because they are outmatched or because they don't have an army. Don't have an army? Don't start a war. They're already receiving illicit aid from governments like Iran whom-- as an American-- are my enemy. And you want me to favor Palestine? Take a hike. They ally themselves with people who have chanted death to America for decades, and abetted terrorists who have killed Americans. They don't share my core values, and they aren't interested in being my friends regardless of how we set policy. It will always be "Death to the West".

They didn't stockpile these rockets in a matter of days. They were never interested in peace. They've been planning this for years just as they dug their tunnels for years. They are practitioners of perpetual war. They picked up the sword. This is their bed to lie in.

I'm happy to help the Israelis if they request it.

Didn't know you were such a big believer in moral relativism.

And spare me the feigned outrage at Palestine stockpiling weapons, you sit in a country that has more weapons and nukes than most every other country combined. And you also happen to be speaking from the unique position of being part of the only country in the world that has actually used nuclear weapons - your calls for the destruction of a people who have gathered a bunch of bottle rockets after being forced to live in an open air prison rings a little hollow, guy.

And you are perfectly free to go help the Israelis all you want, so how about you stop asking me to dig in my pockets for that help?

"Regardless how we set policy". LOL. Can you please name the all of the significant overtures made to the Palestinians that you are acting like they are refusing? Because I can list 100s, if not 1000s, of transgressions Israel has committed against the Palestinians.

I wish I lived next door to you. Because in your little world, it would be completely ok for me to walk right through your front door, demand that this is my house now, and apparently you wouldn't be upset at all.

Maybe I'll offer you your old couch and a spot in the backyard out near where we bury the dog shit as concession for me taking your house. Then I can be just like you, and with a stupid look on my face exclaim "regardless of what I try to do, Madmick just hates me".

 

[SakurabasEar]

I ask you the same about America.

Right, so you understand the standpoint then but your ignorant to the history pre 00s I'm assuming. Iran is the enemy of not only America but also just about 20 other countries as well.

Pick whatever moral high ground you want, the current "regime" in iran is about as clear a modern enemy to society as it gets.

 

[Samjj]

Being a Jew and being an Arab are not mutually exclusive. Hebrew was only revived as the daily language of Jews through the Zionist movement, in the premodern period they spoke Arabic and were otherwise indistinguishable from other Arabs except for religious identity markers. According to your logic they were all Levantine Arabs who were communally organized along religious lines whether that religion was Islam, Judaism, or Christianity.

The Druze were by far the most distinctive religious group and the one that could've reasonably made a claim to being a nation since they mostly lived together in a geographically contiguous area(Mount Druze) apart from the other religious groups and were often the most staunchly independent of the central state. The native Jews tended to live alongside their Christian and Muslim neighbors, at most organizing themselves into their own city quarters or villages.

Jews in many places maintained their own Judeo-Arabic dialects. Think Arabic-Yiddish
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judeo-Arabic_dialects

And actually your categorization of Jews as being ethnically Arab and religiously Jewish is a fundamental misunderstanding of Judaism and a projection of hegemonic-Christian interpretation of “Religion” with a capital R.
Judaism has always seen itself first of all as a people and nation before an organized religion or system of worship.
But hey, you can keep telling Jews how they identify and historically identified with your white Christian entitled way of thinking - but it’s just not accurate.

 

[meauneau]

Self-defence excuse won't take you far, because especially in this case every party has a case or doesn't have a case.
Saying that the existence of Hamas and their actions are justified, it's all the same for the Israel security forces and what they carry out : Event of violence and the threat for it to escalate more must be neutralised or an act must be retaliated, in any instance you can just switch sides and say that they started it. Nothing positive will come out of this and people will die but if that's what people want, then I'm sure they can have plenty more of that.

The way you paint it here is as if they were both equal in power. There is a huge disparity in power. Israel has the greater power and uses it to terrorise Palestinians and you know exactly why they terrorise Palestinians. To get them to submit to israel's demands and to distract them from what they are doing which is expelling people from their homes and taking the land by force. If anyone resists he is labelled a terrorist and shot or imprisoned. One is the aggressor the other the victim.

Until today, the majority of the lands belong to Israel (according to international law) so they are the party that are putting up the parts to be annexed to Palestine : there is no other trade apart from peace, so one side has all to gain and nothing to lose.
I'm sure people aren't happy with a compromise but it's all there is. It's that or business as usual.

Exactly because israel has people in the governments of other nations. Israel has a lot of power, military and political. And also has many organisations that cover up their crimes and distract people's attention from their crimes. If you point out a crime they will quickly play victim and call you a anti semite. They want that land and they hate non Jews, this is what what it reduces to.

 

[fishNjits]

What does "anti-Semitic" even mean? When I call the state of israel a terrorist state they say I am anti-Semitic, when I critique the religion I am anti-Semitic, when I criticise the practice of sucking the blood off of a baby's penis I am anti-Semitic.

It has lost it's meaning.

I can post passages from the talmud if you want.

That's where you're going? The definition of anti-Semitic? Fine, it's libelous of Jews and Jewish beliefs. And no, we are not taught this.

As for Metzizah B'Peh, if you're criticizing it for being unhygienic, then no, you're not being anti-Semitic. There's a reason why the vast majority of Jewish circumcisions ignore this practice modern day.

Post a way. It's been awhile since this has been done. I guarantee for everything you post, I'll show Talmudic passages and explanations that show the opposite. Remember, Talmud is a discussion of the great rabbis of that age. At most, you'll show the position of just one rabbi.

I'll start for you:

Talmud Bava Metzia 114b

Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai said: The graves of gentiles do not cause ritual impurity in a dwelling as it says (Ezekiel 34:31) "Now, you [Israel] are My sheep , the sheep of My pasture, you are Man (Adam)…" You [Israel, the subject of the verse] are called Man (Adam) and gentiles are not called Man (Adam).

Seems bad, huh? And yet...

Talmud Gittin 47a

A gentile has the ability to purchase land in Israel in order to dig holes and caves as it says (Psalms 115:16) "As for the heavens, the heavens are the Lord's; but the earth He has given to mankind (Bnei Adam=sons of Adam)."

So, non-Jews are not Man, but are of mankind? How does that make sense?

It works, because Jews were seen as an integrated unit - as one person, one man in the first passage. But it was recognized in the second passage that gentiles were as much homo sapiens as Jews. We are all descendants of Adam (the original Man).

Non-Jews are promised a place in the world to come if they follow the Noahide laws. Does that sound like we'd consider non-Jews to be non-human?

So don't go around telling us what Jews are taught because you read it on the internet.

 

[fishNjits]

Jews in many places maintained their own Judeo-Arabic dialects. Think Arabic-Yiddish
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judeo-Arabic_dialects

One of the small, but really memorable and joyous vignettes of my life occurred when I was a teenager. I was the usher at shul one Saturday morning. I was outside the door of the sanctuary and a very old couple came up to ask me a question.

It took me a bit, but I realized they were speaking Ladino (Judeo-Spanish). My junior high and high school Spanish was good enough at the time to have a conversation with them. I've never met anybody before or since that spoke Ladino.

 

[meauneau]

That's where you're going? The definition of anti-Semitic? Fine, it's libelous of Jews and Jewish beliefs. And no, we are not taught this.

As for Metzizah B'Peh, if you're criticizing it for being unhygienic, then no, you're not being anti-Semitic. There's a reason why the vast majority of Jewish circumcisions ignore this practice modern day.

Post a way. It's been awhile since this has been done. I guarantee for everything you post, I'll show Talmudic passages and explanations that show the opposite. Remember, Talmud is a discussion of the great rabbis of that age. At most, you'll show the position of just one rabbi.

I'll start for you:

Talmud Bava Metzia 114b

Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai said: The graves of gentiles do not cause ritual impurity in a dwelling as it says (Ezekiel 34:31) "Now, you [Israel] are My sheep , the sheep of My pasture, you are Man (Adam)…" You [Israel, the subject of the verse] are called Man (Adam) and gentiles are not called Man (Adam).

Seems bad, huh? And yet...

Talmud Gittin 47a

A gentile has the ability to purchase land in Israel in order to dig holes and caves as it says (Psalms 115:16) "As for the heavens, the heavens are the Lord's; but the earth He has given to mankind (Bnei Adam=sons of Adam)."

So, non-Jews are not Man, but are of mankind? How does that make sense?

It works, because Jews were seen as an integrated unit - as one person, one man in the first passage. But it was recognized in the second passage that gentiles were as much homo sapiens as Jews. We are all descendants of Adam (the original Man).

Non-Jews are promised a place in the world to come if they follow the Noahide laws. Does that sound like we'd consider non-Jews to be non-human?

So don't go around telling us what Jews are taught because you read it on the internet.

What about Sanhedrin 57a?: A Jew can keep what he steals from a Gentile but a Gnetile cannot keepe what he stole from a Jew. If a Jew kills a Gentile there is no death penalty but if a Gentile kills a Jew there is a death penalty. If a Jew can withhold the wages of a Gentile but a Gentile cannot withhold the wages of a Jew.

"if one stole or robbed30 or [seized] a beautiful woman,31 or [committed] similar offences,32 if [these were perpetrated] by one Cuthean33 against another, [the theft, etc.] must not be kept, and likewise [the theft] of an Israelite by a Cuthean, but that of a Cuthean by an Israelite may be retained'?"

"'For murder, whether of a Cuthean by a Cuthean, or of an Israelite by a Cuthean, punishment is incurred; but of a Cuthean by an Israelite, there is no death penalty'"

"the withholding of a labourer's wage.44 One Cuthean from another, or a Cuthean from an Israelite is forbidden, but an Israelite from a Cuthean is permitted."

 

[SanchoMF]

The way you paint it here is as if they were both equal in power. There is a huge disparity in power. Israel has the greater power and uses it to terrorise Palestinians and you know exactly why they terrorise Palestinians. To get them to submit to israel's demands and to distract them from what they are doing which is expelling people from their homes and taking the land by force. If anyone resists he is labelled a terrorist and shot or imprisoned. One is the aggressor the other the victim.

Exactly because israel has people in the governments of other nations. Israel has a lot of power, military and political. And also has many organisations that cover up their crimes and distract people's attention from their crimes. If you point out a crime they will quickly play victim and call you a anti semite. They want that land and they hate non Jews, this is what what it reduces to.

Being equal in power has nothing to do with this situation. I think that if it were then there would've been a solution of some sort in good or bad. As long as violence is involved, it's been more or less non-stop since the 40's and the roles are reversed depending on who engages first at each event. There isn't anything else to it, you can call someone oppressor and label someone victims but that certainly paints an extremely biased picture of the situation that fits simply the narrative you want to represent.
Similar tone can be pulled when discussing "why Israel commits to dealing with the Palestinians the way they do?" And there's a million reasons a person could list to justify their treatment of Palestinians the way they do.
This approach doesn't lead to anybody winning anything, only to more conflict.

I do agree that usually when people have something to hide and they're confronted by criticism, they'll pull out some cards to silence the critics : it can be anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, racism, sexism what have you. It's the easy deflect.
The bottom line is that if the Palestinians want a nation (with land and all), they're gonna sit down and negotiate. It'll be a compromise that won't please Hamas but they're false prophets selling snake oil, because any uprising through Hamas will be retaliated and here we go again.
If anyone would give a shit about the civilians and less about them being in power, they'd sit down and try to get the best outcome for everyone involved. IMHO that beats bloodshed.

 

[avenue94]

The bottom line is that if the Palestinians want a nation (with land and all), they're gonna sit down and negotiate. It'll be a compromise that won't please Hamas but they're false prophets selling snake oil, because any uprising through Hamas will be retaliated and here we go again.

So what international power or party would mediate these negotiations?