Say no to authoritarianism, say yes to socialism. Free Palestine 🇵🇸 Everyone deserves Human Rights
The slogan From the River to the Sea is about Palestinian liberation that started in the 60s by the PLO for a democratic secular state, not Genocide. The Syrian leader Hafez al-Assad in 1966 maybe, but he’s not Palestinian.
You again are conflating Zionism with Judaism, which are 2 very different things. Israel has never represented all Jewish people and never will, nor are it’s actions done to benefit all Jewish people. The conflation is itself antisemitic. Adi Callai, an Israeli, does a great analysis of how Antisemitism has been weaponized (see 29:01) by Zionism during its history.
Zionism is a settler colonialism project that was able to really start with the support of British Imperialism. Zionism as a political movement started with Theodore Herzl in the 1880s as a ‘modern’ way to ‘solve’ the ‘Jewish Question’ of Europe.
Since at least the 1860’s, Europe was increasingly antisemitic and hostile to Jewish people. Zionism was explicitly a Setter Colonialist movement and the native Palestinians were not considered People but Savages by the Europeans. While Zionist Colonization began before it, the Balfor Declaration is when Britain gave it’s backing of the movement in order to ‘solve’ the ‘Jewish Question’ while also creating a Colony in the newly conquered Middle East after WWI in order to exhibit military force in the region and extract natural resources.
That’s when Zionist immigration started to pick up, out of necessity for most as Europe became more hostile and antisemitic. That continued into and during WWII, European countries and even the US refused to expand immigration quotas for Jewish people seeking asylum. The idea that the creation of Israel is a reparation for Jewish people is an after-the-fact justification. While most Jewish immigrants had no choice and just wanted a place to live in peace, it was the Zionist Leadership that developed and implemented the forced transfer, ethnic cleansing, of the native population, Palestinians. Without any Occupation, Apartheid, and ethnic cleansing, there would not be any Palestinian resistance to it.
Herzl himself explicitly considered Zionism a Settler Colonialist project, Setter Colonialism is always violent. The difficulty in creating a democratic Jewish state in an area inhabited by people who are not Jewish, is that enough Palestinian people need to be ‘Transferred’ to have a demographic majority that is Jewish. Ben-Gurion explicitly rejected Secular Bi-national state solutions in favor of partition.
Zionism’s aims in Palestine, its deeply-held conviction that the Land of Israel belonged exclusively to the Jewish people as a whole, and the idea of Palestine’s “civilizational barrenness" or “emptiness” against the background of European imperialist ideologies all converged in the logical conclusion that the native population should make way for thenewcomers.
The idea that the Palestinian Arabs must find a place for themselves elsewhere was articulated early on. Indeed, the founder of the movement, Theodor Herzl, provided an early reference to transfer even before he formally outlined his theory of Zionist rebirth in his Judenstat.
An 1895 entry in his diary provides in embryonic form many of the elements that were to be demonstrated repeatedly in the Zionist quest for solutions to the “Arab problem ”-the idea of dealing with state governments over the heads of the indigenous population, Jewish acquisition of property that would be inalienable, “Hebrew Land" and “Hebrew Labor,” and the removal of the native population.
Israel justifies the settlements and military bases in the West Bank in the name of Security. However, the reality of the settlements on-the-ground has been the cause of violent resistance and a significant obstacle to peace, as it has been for decades.
This type of settlement, where the native population gets ‘Transferred’ to make room for the settlers, is a long standing practice.
The mass ethnic cleansing campaign of 1948:
Further, declassified Israeli documents show that the Occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip were deliberately planned before being executed in 1967:
While the peace process was exploited to continue de-facto annexation of the West Bank via Settlements
The settlements are maintained through a violent apartheid that routinely employs violence towards Palestinians and denies human rights like water access, civil rights, etc. This kind of control gives rise to violent resistance to the Apartheid occupation, jeopardizing the safety of Israeli civilians.
State violence – official and otherwise – is part and parcel of Israel’s apartheid regime, which aims to create a Jewish-only space between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. The regime treats land as a resource designed to serve the Jewish public, and accordingly uses it almost exclusively to develop and expand existing Jewish residential communities and to build new ones. At the same time, the regime fragments Palestinian space, dispossesses Palestinians of their land and relegates them to living in small, over-populated enclaves.
The apartheid regime is based on organized, systemic violence against Palestinians, which is carried out by numerous agents: the government, the military, the Civil Administration, the Supreme Court, the Israel Police, the Israel Security Agency, the Israel Prison Service, the Israel Nature and Parks Authority, and others. Settlers are another item on this list, and the state incorporates their violence into its own official acts of violence. Settler violence sometimes precedes instances of official violence by Israeli authorities, and at other times is incorporated into them. Like state violence, settler violence is organized, institutionalized, well-equipped and implemented in order to achieve a defined strategic goal.
Palestine: A Four Thousand Year History - Nur Masalha
The Concept of Transfer 1882-1948 - Nur Masalha
A History of Modern Palestine - Ilan Pappe
The Hundred Years’ War on Palestine - Rashid Khalidi
The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine - Ilan Pappe
The 1967 Arab-Israeli War: Origins and Consequences - Avi Shlaim
The Biggest Prison on Earth: A History of the Occupied Territories - Ilan Pappe
The Gaza Strip: The Political Economy of De-development - Sara Roy
10 Myths About Israel - Ilan Pappe (summery)
How fascist of them, the GOP would be proud (if not for the racism)
What are you, Israel?
Israel has only ever responded to peaceful protests with lethal violence
When peaceful resistance is made impossible, violent revolution is inevitable
You can’t expect people subjected to systematic violence and dehumanization for generations to not fight back for their own humanity and human rights
As was the bombing of hundreds of civilians in the Capital. Simply a military operation, totally not war
Meanwhile Israel bombed and killed 90 civilians on the same day, including an orphanage
The Apartheid needs to end for all this violence to end, none of these civilians deserve any of this.
No, they did not directly tell the US as far as I can tell. They did so indirectly and with short notice, different from the last time when they gave a 72 hour warning.
Miller states that the Iranian strikes were targeting civilians, while Israel does not target civilians. Both of which are not true.
Notice how Miller, who is representing the US State Department here, frames all of Israel’s actions as defensive and just (despite directly bombing a Capitol, killing hundreds of civilians, and starting a ground invasion), while all the actions of any of Israel’s enemies are unjust and demands consequences (despite attacking military targets and not civilian targets). The double standards are blatant and intentional, in order to justify the US’s continued military support of Israel, despite public opinion, US Law, and International Law.
Yes, I’m aware what the position of the US State Department is. They will always defend America and it’s Allies regardless of the situation. I don’t know why you would just take them at their word instead of look for independent verification. None of this discredit my points in the previous comment, it does show how far Miller will lie about Israeli operations, which have already killed over a thousand civilians in Lebanon.
Iran telegraphed to Arab officials in the region on Monday night that it was going to launch an attack on Israel that would be similar in scale to its April attack when it launched 300 drones and ballistic and cruise missiles at Israel but caused minimal damage, according to Arab officials.
The White House warned earlier on Tuesday that Iran was poised to launch a ballistic missile attack on Israel soon, instantly ratcheting up fears of all-out war in the region.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/01/politics/iran-missile-attack-israel/index.html
It looks like Iran is focusing on Targeting military targets, while Israel has been attacking civilian targets, killing already over a thousand in Lebanon. On top still facilitating a genocide in Gaza. The only way for this cycle of violence to end is for Israel to stop the aggression, which I only see as realistic when the US stops sending weapons
Lewis says he believes Iran’s latest strike was designed to show some restraint. The warheads fell primarily on air bases that may have been used in last week’s attacks on Hezbollah’s leadership, he points out. “It’s very typical to see Iranians pick military targets that are linked to the military strike that they’re responding to,” he says.
The strike also appeared to largely avoid civilian areas. The only publicly acknowledged death from the attack so far was a Palestinian man in the West Bank who was apparently struck by a falling missile body. A school in central Israel was also hit, though no casualties were reported.
https://www.npr.org/2024/10/02/nx-s1-5135646/iran-missile-strike-israel-appears-to-hit-some-targets
Islamists are not ‘fundamentally more difficult to deal with’ than any other religious ideology.
If you’re issue is radicalization, then you should also be against Zionist aggression. The realities of Settler Colonialism, bombing civilians, stealing land, violent occupation, will inevitably radicalize those people to resist that violence by whatever means they can.
They would exist regardless of Iran, the exist because of Israel’s Settler Colonialism, which Israel will never stop doing
Yes, they are the aggressor. Hezbollah only exists as blowback from Israel’s previous invasions and occupation
Israel is aiming to reoccupy Lebanon. These are the exact same tactics Israel always uses when expanding their Settler Colonialism
I agree that it’s reasonable for Ukraine to have a defensive pact and that Russia’s invasion completely justifies the need for a defensive pact in Europe. I just don’t see how they’ll agree to it from a geopolitical standpoint if their concern, justified or not, is Moscow being within range of US nukes. I think a different defensive pact without US hegenomy could satisfy every European countries security needs, but I don’t know how realistic that is either
I would think letting Russia keep Ukrainian land would be playing into Russias hands. What are you proposing? This seems like the most realistic way to end the war and return Ukrainian territory rightfully to Ukraine.
Edit: can someone explain why I’m being downvoted? An unconditional surrender by Russia would be great, but I don’t see how that can be accomplished
Same playbook as always for Israel. They’ve done this in the past with Lebanon, with Golan Heights, with Gaza, and now again in Lebanon
Their link under Read More goes into more details. Arguing that it’s unreasonable because Putin has no genuine interest in peace is a valid criticism. But it’s disingenuous to say Veterans for Peace is advocating for Ukraine to accede to Russian demands.
First, an immediate ceasefire–an end to the fighting. That will require Russia to immediately pull back its troops and weapons out of Ukraine.
But negotiations mean that both sides need to give something. So NATO and the U.S. should agree to pull back heavy weapons and missiles away from the Russian border and recognize in public what NATO has long acknowledged privately: that Ukraine will not be joining the military alliance in any foreseeable future.
New negotiations, organized by combinations of the United Nations and the broad Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (which includes Russia, Ukraine, most European countries, and the United States) could move further towards renewing lapsed European arms control treaties and eventually towards full nuclear disarmament across Europe.
After Horrific Invasion, ‘Diplomacy Not War’ Must Be More Than a Slogan
I don’t see anywhere in their statements any advocating for Ukraine to accede to Russian demands. That goes against their belief that “Russia out of Ukraine” is the most direct route to peace
https://www.veteransforpeace.org/take-action/diplomacy-not-war-peace-ukraine
Here’s a link to the whole conversation for anyone interested