So is Israel just going to completely overtake Palestine?
So is Israel just going to completely overtake Palestine?
I saw an article about them attacking Lebanon now. So, where will it stop? Have the Israeli government ever spoken about this?
You're viewing a single thread.
Completely occupying Palestinian land has been the plan for over half a century.
With this terrorist attack, Israel is trying to wrap it up.
They could have completed their colonization under the guise of righteous vengeance, but:
That now has very little chance of succeeding because of three important factors 1) it's taking much too long 2)they're indisputably committing witnessed, recorded and shared war crimes and 3) the goodwill they've accumulated for 70 years as a stabilizing ally is wearing off pretty quickly.
There's more support for Palestine now than there has been with these same Israeli attacks occurring for the past 70 years.
Palestine is officially recognized by 145 countries or so at this point.
So, likely scenario is there's going to be a ceasefire eventually and a similar paltry amount of land will be given to a nascent "official" Palestinian authority under the practical authority of Israel, which is not ideal, but it might actually result in the beginning of a two-state solution that's been suggested since Israel became a country.
In practical terms, Palestine getting a "country", not much will change between Israel and Palestine because the establishment of Palestine doesn't affect the fundamental religious conflict between the two.
That's where it looks like it's headed.
I hope I'm wrong and something better happens.
Palestine being a wholly recognized nation with borders would make it so much easier for the world community to use its leverage on both Israel and Palestine for any of their shenanigans. As it stands now, it’s still arguably “an internal conflict.”
That’s a lot different from “attacking a sovereign nation.”
Exactly.
No it wouldn't because the problem isn't with borders, it's with government. The Palestinian government has squandered every opportunity and has done everything it could to stop progress. Its Arab allies have been dedicated for decades to do everything in their power to act on the behalf and in the best interest of Palestine from going to wars to destroy Israel to islamic world organized boycotts and sanctions against Israel to diplomatic pressure on the west to do something to providing their own peace proposals to giving them arms to taking them in as refugees to giving them billions in humanitarian aid annually and the list goes on and on... But every time, their efforts blew up in their faces. There's a reason why these countries are starting to recognize Israel.
Permanently Deleted
You're talking out of your ass. Israel has no plans to take over Gaza. They already had it and even had settlements there going back all the way before Israel gained its independence. But they voluntarily existed in 2005 in hopes of fostering peace with the Gazans... Instead the first thing they did was elect Hamas and commit terrorist attacks.
So if you rewind another 50 years or so, you'll understand the statement I made a little better.
The israeli conquest of Palestinian land started quite a ways before 2005.
I literally don't care, you made a false statement. Israel unilaterally left Gaza. They don't have settlements there anymore and they don't plan to. Making up stuff doesn't make you sound smart.
You might want to care, since your false claims are entirely based on a woefully inaccurate and incomplete historical understanding of the conflict.
Nothing that I have said is false. In fact I can source every single one of my claims. I know a propaganda fueled drone such as yourself can't do the same, which is why you came back with this drivel instead of providing substance
You claimed:
"I literally don't care".
Sure doesn't seem to jive with your histrionics.
Also, the history of Israel and Palestine is incredibly well documented. Going back 75 years.
You could literally search on any engine and find it instantly. You don't even need a particular source to figure out how old this conflict is.
Which is probably where you should start.
If you actually took into account the context, it's very obvious that I said I don't care about your claim that conflict is old and goes back many years. Nobody is disputing that. My point is that you made specific claim, which is that Israel wants to annex the Palestinian territories entirely as their ultimate goal, however, that is blatantly false because Israel literally gave up their settlements in Gaza voluntarily in 2005 and unilaterally existed. If their ultimate goal is complete conquest, why would they have done such a move? This event contradicts your thesis and disproves your claim.
Paraphrased: "After decades of colonization, why would Israel publicly state that they were ending all illegal ongoing colonization?"
-
Because Israel already took most of the land(see picture) and didn't have to give any back.
-
Because there was a lot of complaints about them colonizing Palestine, especially as the internet became more popular and people became more aware of the illegal Israeli colonization of Palestinian land.
-
By publicly stating that Israel would no longer annex Palestinian land, they didn't have to give up any of the land they already colonized over the past half century, civilians could continue to colonize Palestinian land because it wasn't official government or military colonization, and people would be mollified.
And it worked.
You apparently aren't aware that Israelis are still colonizing Palestine because 19 years ago they put out a press release that said "no backsies, but some of us will stop officially colonizing this country after 60 years".
The civilians are still settling Palestinian land(they never stopped) that has been now evacuated because, you know, they're killing all the Palestinians.
A lot of unnecessary fluff, but you do have a question hidden down there.
What fluff? I wrote 5 sentences lmao
Paraphrased: “After decades of colonization, why would Israel publicly state that they were ending all illegal ongoing colonization?”
Yeah, this isn't going to fly by me. This is just the strawman fallacy. That is NOT what I asked. I asked a very simple and straight forward question:
If their ultimate goal is complete conquest, why would they have done such a move?
This is clearly in reference to their unilateral exit in 2005 from Gaza. If you want to have a discussion with me then at least have the decency to be honest. I won't respond to an answer about a question I didn't ask, but I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt to answer the actual question I asked. If you can't help but be disingenuous then I'm afraid this discussion will end with my comment here.
https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2024/3/8/israeli-settlement-expansion-in-palestinian-areas-amounts-to-war-crime-un https://www.aljazeera.com/features/longform/2024/3/19/how-israeli-settlers-are-expanding-illegal-outposts-amid-gaza-war
Al Jazeera is literally a state sponsored propaganda outlet that is owned by the authoritarian theocracy of Qatar. This outlet is a bad source in general, but it's notorious for it's misinformation and outright when it comes to this specific conflict. If this is where you get your information then I'm not surprised why your talking points are nothing than inaccurate propaganda.
This image is a prime example of what propaganda looks like. I know you don't have any, but let's use our critical thinking skills for a bit and analyze why this picture is complete trash:
- The key insinuates that Jews are foreign to the area. This is also entirely false. Jews have always had very sizable presence in this region dating back thousands of years. They were there long before islam, long before Arab colonization, long before the Roman even came up with the term Palestine. This is because Jews are indigenous to the area, but the word choices for the key is trying to erase that.
- The colors chosen are also propaganda. They chose green for Palestine, which is the national color, but instead of using blue for Israel, they chose white. Why is that? Well that's easy, because this color scheme gives the impression that Palestine is "real" entity and it is being "erased", when that's not the case.
- The first map is intentionally there to insinuate that Palestine existed prior to 1947. This is entirely false. Before the creation of the modern states, before that there was the British mandate, and before that it was the Ottoman Empire which had completely different division for this region. Palestine as sovereign entity has quite literally never existed at any point in history. The concept of a Palestinian nation is as artificial and new as the modern state of Israel.
- Also the the first map is also dishonest in another way because it colors inhabited areas as green. The Negev desert for example is largely uninhabited but it is colored green to give the impression that Palestine is more than what it actually is. Most muslim Arabs back then lived in the same sliver of land as what it showed for the Jews, but if they just showed an honest map of the Arab and Jewish settlements then it would give a different story and this wouldn't be such a good propaganda map, now would it?
- The second map tries insinuate that the UN took away from Palestine in 1947, but that's false because that was the very first time Palestine was even acknowledged as a sovereign entity.
- The third map exists to try and give a sense of progression while also masking away massive amounts of context... like the wars of 1948 and 1967 when Palestine rejected any plans for peace and coexistence, and they along with their Arab allies formed coalition armies and invaded Israel from every angle with the explicit intention of destroying... but they ended up losing both wars in a pretty convincing fashion against Israel by itself. As a part of the peace agreements the Arabs agreed to cede land to Israel.
- The first 3 maps go from 1947 to 1967, but then on the fourth map, it skips 38 years and stops at 2005... 19 years ago. Why would it skip all of this time? And why stop at this point in 2005? Well it's simple, if they stopped any earlier then their propaganda map would be called out for not recognizing that Israel left Gaza as that's a the biggest sign that Israel is trying to cooperate to find peace, but if they stopped the map more recently then their propaganda map would've been called out for not pointing out any of the atrocities that the Palestinians instigated and committed. This point in 2005 is just perfect for propaganda, it's far back enough in time to feel disconnected from the modern Palestinian terrorist attacks and wars, but recent enough where it could be argued into the present.
- Finally, the map has no source. It's a perfect propaganda piece because it can't be traced back to where it originated and therefore isn't a source to verify the accuracy of the information.
Now what did we learn from all of this little exercise? A little of critical thinking can go a long way in recognizing and dispelling propaganda. Try it some time!
Wow, what a miss you took.
I hope that didn't take you a long time.
Then again, it's much funnier if you did.
Your argument against the Israeli colonization of Palestine is that the Palestinian settlements are even smaller than they appear to be on the map.
Yes, that is the a problem. That is the point of the maps, to show how little land Palestinians have left.
Your argument is that people only own the land of the country they're standing directly upon. Amazing.
You should go argue that to literally any country in the world where that is not correct.
Go look up the term "national boundaries"
However,
Your incorrect understanding of borders is exactly what the Israeli government is arguing as the reason it's okay for them to continue to illegally colonize Palestine and execute the civilians there.
It's also not true, but you don't seem very concerned with the truth.
As for pretending to read the article incorrectly so that you can argue against it, that's just you arguing against yourself.
Not super relevant.
Your arguments:
-
Irrelevant to the amount of land that Israel has illegally annexed from Palestine.
-
You complain that colors are propaganda! Doubtful, since so many of these maps use different colors, and it is not relevant to the amount of land that Israel has illegally annexed from Palestine for the past 70 years
-
Nope, the first map details the settlement area of the Palestinian people. Again, you can look at border maps for many countries, but steal yourself! You'll be shocked that people are not standing on every square inch of their country. Your argument here also is not relevant to the amount of land that Israel has illegally annexed from Palestine for the past 70 years.
-
Colors(you already did this) are not relevant to the amount of land that Israel has illegally annex from Palestine for the past 70 years.
-
"It's not stealing land because fewer countries recognized Palestine as a country then."
I mean...Taiwan...
Actually I'll explain this because it doesn't seem like you understand much about national politics. Or geography. Or colonization.
145 countries recognize Palestine as a country.
A dozen (12, for you) countries recognize Taiwan as a country
If Taiwan gets annexed by China, it's still going to be a country being annexed(land being stolen) by China, even if not everybody is willing to recognize Taiwan as a country yet.
Also, pretty irrelevant to the amount of land that Israel has illegally annexed from Palestine for the past 70 years.
- Is this "argument" also a basic misunderstanding by you of politics and geography? No! It's a tacit statement of approval by you for Israel annexing a bunch of land.
Greeeeat.
All you're doing here is arguing that Russia annexing Crimea and trying to annex Ukraine is cool because... Russia wants land that belongs to others.
- Your complaint here is that Palestinians didn't lose as much land in some decades as they did in other decades, so none of the annexation counts!
Not a great argument.
Kind of missing the point of how Violet is to steal land from people after you kill the civilians on it.
And 8. Your most bizarre criticism. There's no source for this map?
Like, how do you get such s basic thing incorrect? Do you even know how search engines work?
Here's a bunch of sources for that map, even with different colors for your weird color fetish.
You'll have to come up with all new reasons why these different colors scare you.
https://www.palestineportal.org/learn-teach/israelpalestine-the-basics/maps/maps-loss-of-land/
Here's one on your side, they used different colors and swear that the map is wrong;
https://aijac.org.au/fresh-air/disappearing-palestine-the-maps-that-lie/
Unfortunately, their "correct" maps begin and end in the exact same place and still highlight disappearing Palestinian territory, and they don't even include the illegal settlements by Israeli civilians.
My answer completely and credibly answers your question:
Israel made that disingenuous 2005 statement because they knew they didn't have to give any land back to Palestine, because they knew that Israeli civilian settlers would continue to annex Palestine, and because it would make people like you believe that they stopped colonizing Palestine, contrary to all of the evidence of continued Israeli settlement of Palestinian land in the ensuing years.
Including right now.
Where they are colonizing Palestine and putting up residential neighborhoods.
That's in the sources from my previous comment that you seem a bit wary to mention.
Here's the BBC reporting on the continued illegal Israeli settlement of Palestine.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-68490034
Here's the times of Israel, proudly declaring their intent to illegally settle Palestinian land, sanctioned by the defense ministry.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/government-panel-greenlights-nearly-3500-new-west-bank-homes/
Here's PBS, describing Israel planning to illegally annex and colonize Palestine:
Here's Reuters describing The ongoing illegal annexation and settlement of Palestine by Israel:
Go ahead, please try to explain how all of these sources, including Israel and their ministry of defense stating that they are going to annex Palestine, are just kidding about the illegal annexation of Palestine.
Your argument that the colors are wrong has nothing to do with the number of times Israel has invaded, razed, annexed and colonized Palestine, nor with the amount of civilians it's executed or with schools, hospitals it's bombed.
That was a pretty fun victory lap for me.
Keep swinging though, I like dancing on laurels
-
-
Don't bother, that must be one of those tantrum fueled hasbara accounts.
Thanks, it's fine.
I have a lot of free time and it's fun to respond to mindless bad faith with diametric sincerity.
They always get boggled.
That refers to an agreement by the Israeli military to stop officially invading and colonizing Palestine after successfully colonizing over 90% of their territory.
Unofficially, government invasion continued and the usrael government did nothing to stop illegal civilian Israeli invaders and colonizers.
Israel also continued to bomb civilian establishments and execute civilians up until the present day!
Source: dude, trust me
Permanently Deleted
Unironically defending genocide by using “antisemitism” as an excuse, implying by your own admission that all Jews are genocidal
Who do you think you’re fooling, bud? Fucking Nazi.
Permanently Deleted