• 52fighters@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    7 hours ago

    I think support for Israel is based on their sharing three principle values of the west: liberalism, democracy, & capitalism.

  • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    15 hours ago

    A unified and stable middle east would be and would have been a global superpower with the ability to influence independent control over major global trade routes and energy supply.

    This is why the Israel is and has been imperative to U.S. foreign policy.

  • DandomRude@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    73
    ·
    edit-2
    16 hours ago

    Zionism is inherently racist. This movement has nothing to do with Judaism. One of the greatest misdeeds of the Netanyahu regime - tho it pales in comparison to their other misdeeds - is to present their inhumane actions as the Jews’ point of view. Israel’s strategy in the last couple of year was to portray all completely justified criticism of Zionism, and especially of the state of Israel’s inhumane approach to its realization, as anti-Semitism. There is no truth in this whatsoever. Zionism is not Judaism and the state of Israel does not stand for the Jews as a religious group - these days Israel only stands for a criminal regime that murders helpless people and breaks international law. This is not about religion, but about crimes against humanity committed by a sovereign state, by Israel, their criminal regime and all their henchmen.

    • RogueBanana@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Religion is certainly a powerful weapon in politics which is especially obvious with the trump situation. I agree that Israel don’t represent them but I could definitely see how they can use it for their own agenda and some religious people will happily support them and their propaganda.

  • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Don’t I deserve to seize my childhood home, or the one I sold last week? no anti-semitic replies please.

  • Kalysta@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    17 hours ago

    The jewish people have never wholly owned that area. Persians, Arabs, and many other races have also always lived there. It’s literally in the bible.

    • psud@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Also remember that the bronze age Jews were not at all special among the tribes of the area, their story about themselves is aggrandizing fiction that all the tribes did, it’s just the Jews’ stories survived and became popular

      Also bronze age. Those that left left so long ago, the only right they have to the place is military might and the legal right given based on lobbying and the racism of the law makers in question.

      • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        7 hours ago

        Iron age, the Hebrew age of myth was set during the bronze age and in the immediate period of the bronze age collapse. Moses was bronze age, david was post bronze age collapse, the first diaspora was during the early Iron age, and the second diaspora was during antiquity.

        Sorry if im being anal about it but one of the few good things about the old testament is that it tracks the evolution from bronze to iron pretty well, also Cyrus the great works as a solid historical reference point. But yeah there was about 700 years between the end of the bronze age and the end of the first diaspora, and about a thousand years to the second diaspora. For reference the Roman empire still existed seven hundred years ago.

        • psud@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Thanks, I’m not great on biblical history, so corrections and detail are welcome

          • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            4 hours ago

            Oh I aint either, but certain groups and events mentioned work as solid reference points. The Philistines were most like Bronze age Greek settlers set up by the Egyptians to work as a march for example. I just know a lot about the Bronze age collapse and the Bronze age. Also when I say set during its in the same way Red dead 2 is set during the late 1800s, Moses at best is the faint memory of a legendary story that was mythologized similar to King Arthur.

      • masterofn001@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 hours ago

        They genocided the Canaanites in all of them.

        There is historical/archaeological/genetic evidence.

        That was how they stole that land in the first place. By murdering every man, woman, child, and animal in the land.

        • MisterScruffy@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          Genocide of the canaanites is definitely in the Bible but possibly/probably didn’t happen as much as the Bible says. I’m sure there were times when whole cities were put to the sword but a lot of the stories in the Bible seem more like they were made up later as a way of claiming racial purity. It made it so the Hebrews could say “there’s no way we’re mixed with canaanites cuz we killed all the canaanites”

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        12 hours ago

        If you’re using the old testament to say they lived there then you cannot ignore the old testament saying other people lived there too.

        • atro_city@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          I think you misunderstand. I’m saying the bible is a shit piece of cobbles together fairy tales, ramblings, sheep herder narrations, and hallucinations that has been rewritten and retold in so many different versions that is serves little to no historical evidence. You might as well be born in 4000 and basing your historical knowledge on winnie the pooh to recount what happened in 2000.

  • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    edit-2
    17 hours ago

    In addition to the first Israeli migrants being Europeans, they displaced the actual indigenous population that was native to the land. The Muslim and Christian populations are mostly descendents from ancient Israelis that converted.

    Israel is basically just the US, which is why they’re such strong allies. They have the same roots.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      16 hours ago

      they displaced the actual indigenous population that was native to the land.

      They also sterilized a bunch of Ethiopian and Mizrahi Jews, on the grounds that these non-European ethinic cohorts were having too many kids.

      Incidentally, Israel government has been grappling with a big childlessness crisis which threatens to tank their Jewish population.

      One big reason for the genocide in Gaza (which has been in effect since 2006, but recently hit a fevered pitch) is that - despite their best efforts - the Israeli government has failed to neuter the Palestinian population growth rate.

      So much of Israeli policy boils down to white nationalist eugenics.

      • naught101@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        14 hours ago

        Source (on the first bit in particular)? I mean, that’s easy to believe, given the behaviour of other European colonists in other places, but also not the kind of thing I’d want to claim without references.

        • Silic0n_Alph4@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          14 hours ago

          The things to look up are Beta Israel (a lost tribe who were discovered in Ethiopia) and Operation Solomon (how they wound up in Israel). From there, you might find some answers from Israeli sources or elsewhere. I’ve similarly heard this assertion/rumour that the women of Beta Israel were sterilised after their incredible discovery and rescue, but haven’t seen authoritative sources for either side. Still, this should be an interesting rabbit hole to go down.

    • GarlicToast@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      15 hours ago

      The Jewish communities of Zfat, Gaza (yea, that one pre 1929) would disagree. They lived there for hundreds of years.

        • GarlicToast@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 hours ago

          Everyone migrated to Israel, it’s literally an ancient migration route.

          In more modern times, Israel had many Jewish communities that the local Muslims tried to eradicate. Some of them successfully, and in such cases the local Palestinians are migrants that kicked off the local Jews.

          So to be accurate, the first mass migration of Jewish communities into Israel in modern times happened from Eastern Europe and Yemen.

          We need to differentiate, as at the same time, Muslims migrated too into Israel. Some of them got royally fucked by history, they left the little they had, migrated for better work and were left with nothing for generations.

          • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 hours ago

            The region has been a site of religious, not ethnic, conflict. Jews that converted to Islam were able to stay in the Caliphate, the idea that all ethnic Jews were expelled is a myth. There was a lot of emigration, but the truth is that many of the Muslim Palestinians today are descendants of ancient Jewish people.

            Claiming that Palestinians are just invaders that stole Jewish land is bad history.

  • Wes4Humanity@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    127
    ·
    edit-2
    20 hours ago

    Lol… Their ancestors only lived there after they ethnically cleansed the people who were already living there. They’ve been doing this crap for a long time.

    Edit: to clarify, I’m talking about the Jewish people of Israel

    • protist@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      50
      ·
      22 hours ago

      When you say “they,” are you referring to all humans throughout all of human history? Not conquering/displacing people is a much more recent international norm

      • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        34
        ·
        edit-2
        21 hours ago

        More of a recent virtue signal we’ve been propagandized to believe, while continuing the conquering and displacement without skipping a beat.

        While the west was writing the UN declaration of human rights, they were hard at work creating the state of Israel, directly denying Palestine their right to democracy and displacing a million of them.

        At the end of WW2 America, and the rest of the anglo-allies, assisted France in trying to reclaim their colonies, rejecting hundreds of millions their “basic human right” to democracy; all of this went on for decades after the declaration was ratified, as if that meant anything.

        Human rights don’t apply as long as you are labelled a communist, terrorist, separatist, extremist, pedo, etc, etc. Then they can torture you in a black site all nice and legal.

        Most of our history has been written by sociopathic criminals.

        • protist@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          ·
          20 hours ago

          If you look at the entirety of human history, genocides and displacements have objectively been at an all-time low since the end of WWII

          • CommanderCloon@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            13 hours ago

            It’s not the first time that peace exists you know, and it’s an incredibly short span that you’re describing, one which I think everyone agrees is closer to its end than anything

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        The ancients very much understood the value in just changing leadership. So conquering yes, genocide? Usually only when religion is involved.

        • GarlicToast@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 hours ago

          You live in lala land.

          Losing a war meant death to all adult males and raping of the women. Not different then any other mammal on earth.

          My genes, and my genes only!

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 hours ago

            That’s breathtakingly untrue. I know it’s the sensational popular view of historical warfare but it’s just not true. Generally the worst thing that would happen is to be enslaved. But as time goes on and we develop different power structures after the Romans, decapitation of the government becomes far more preferred. So there’s a big battle, the loser leader gets killed, and the remaining nobles swear loyalty to the new leader. Trained people are simply too valuable to kill out of hand.

            Of course we do have documented instances of genocide and mass destruction. Nobody is saying it didn’t happen. It just wasn’t the normal mode of operation.

        • protist@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 hours ago

          This is fundamentally not true. Invading, looting then burning down entire towns, killing men, and raping and/or kidnapping women and children was practiced across the globe by many different cultures for thousands of years

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 hours ago

            You’re confusing the fact that stuff happened, with that stuff being the go to thing to do. Even the Mongols preferred to take towns with the populace intact so they could get taxes as soon as possible. Popular history blows the genocidal stuff way out of proportion.

            • protist@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              9 hours ago

              Dude. I’m confusing “the fact that stuff happened” with the fact that stuff happened lmao

              I don’t know what history you’re reading, but sexual violence and the destruction of towns and cities has been pervasive in war for millennia. Here’s a brief introduction for you

              • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                9 hours ago

                Stop. Just stop. If you can’t defend this-

                When you say “they,” are you referring to all humans throughout all of human history? Not conquering/displacing people is a much more recent international norm

                Without bringing up a Wikipedia article about rape then you’ve already lost.

      • مهما طال الليل@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        21 hours ago

        Not true. At least not for the Muslim conquest of the Levant according to Ben Gurion, Israel’s first prime minister:

        “The fellahin are not descendants of the Arab conquerors, who captured Eretz Israel and Syria in the seventh century CE. The Arab victors did not destroy the agricultural population they found in the country. They expelled only the alien Byzantine rulers, and did not touch the local population. Nor did the Arabs go in for settlement. Even in their former habitations the Arabs did not engage in farming…their whole interest in the new countries was political, religious and material: to rule, to propagate Islam, and to collect taxes…the Jewish farmer, like any other farmer, was not easily torn from his soil…Despite the repression and suffering the rural population remained unchanged.” [7]

        Ben Gurion is quoted by Shlomo Sand in his book https://blogs.umb.edu/joinercenter/2012/10/09/review-of-shlomo-sand-the-invention-of-the-jewish-people-london-verso-2009-translated-by-yael-lotan/

    • YTG123@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      20 hours ago

      According to the Bible, yes. Which is most likely not true. Remember that Zionism started as a secular movement, with religious people getting more (very) on board relatively recently

      • Wes4Humanity@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        20 hours ago

        Interesting… Is there more accurate information about how the Israelites ended up in that region? Did they just never do the whole Egypt thing?

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          18 hours ago

          The history has scant evidence, but we can discount the whole exile story. Slaves tend to be maltreated and are the last ones to be fed during famine, and that leaves physical evidence on their skeletons. We don’t have evidence of that in Egypt; for the most part, their monuments were built by farmers who didn’t have anything else to do when the Nile flooded. Also, a large nomadic group–which Israel would have been under Moses according to the Biblical account–should leave behind a lot of trash for archeologists to find today.

          Fundie Christians like to say “Egypt wouldn’t have told stories about a time they lost”, but that doesn’t matter. First, you better bring some good evidence to say the Red Sea parted and people could walk on dry land. Second, as shown above, there should be physical evidence that we can find. It’s not there, and it’s hardly for a lack of trying. This is one of the most picked over parts of the planet by archeologists.

          What seems to have happened is that they just came from there in the first place. Yahwah started as a war god among a larger pantheon. The people who later became the Hebrews worshiped that god as their primary; they didn’t discount the existence of other gods, but they worshiped this one as their primary one (still polytheism at this point). This later evolved into discounting the importance of other gods (henotheism), and much later disregarding the existence of other gods altogether (monotheism). That especially came into play with Persian Zoroastrian influence after the Babylonian Exile.

          In short, it was a religion that evolved out of the beliefs of the people already living there, and they mostly stayed right there. The Egyptian slavery bits were probably from oral stories at a time when Israel had a conflict with Egypt.

          • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            15 hours ago

            There could have even been a smaller group of former Egyptian slaves that fled and settled in Israel with the people who already lived there and over time their religion/culture was adopted by more and more people until it became the dominant one.

            Like a large group of people wandering a desert for 40 years doesn’t make sense, even if 40 years is just a metaphor for a long time and was just one full year. But a small group could have wandered and visited other settlements that might have helped them out but didn’t want them to settle down there, even for a long time.

            Kinda like how most Christians today aren’t descendents of anyone who would have had anything to do with Jesus or even descendent from Jewish people who believed in the Christian predecessor religion. They were just people who at one point were told they had to convert by words, swords, or guns.

            Just speculation based on thinking about the scenario and what cases might put the story somewhere between fiction and truth rather than just being entirely made up (which is also certainly possible).

          • SlyLycan@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            14 hours ago

            Do you have any sources to start learning about/researching this? This is very fascinating and haven’t heard much, if any, of this before.

            • frezik@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              13 hours ago

              Religion For Breakfast is a pretty good YouTube channel for this. Would also recommend Bart Ehrman’s podcast.

        • chaogomu@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          19 hours ago

          Everything before the Babylonian Exile was made up, because the Babylonians sacked, well everything. They destroyed the First Temple, and took away the nobility and priests.

          It was only after the Exile ended that the Hebrews became monotheistic… Sort of. There has been some noises before the Exile, but afterwards it was official.

          It was also after the Exile that the stories of Noah and Moses were first added to the Torah.

          As a note, the Epic of Gilgamesh has a flood story, and as an ancient Babylon story, would have been available for the hostages (the Hebrew priests and nobility) to read.

          • frezik@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            18 hours ago

            Not entirely made up. Some of the late first temple period can be verified. Such as the split between the northern and southern kingdoms, or the Assyrian invasion under Hezekiah. The further you go back, though, the worse the evidence gets. David and Solomon are questionable as historical figures, and anything before that, just forget it. The Egyptian exile never happened.

            • chaogomu@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 hours ago

              Made up, for a given value of made up. They weren’t completely inventing things whole cloth, and had some surviving material to work off of. That and Babylonian records. They had those too. Since Babylon was gone… Well, finders keepers.

            • chaogomu@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              12 hours ago

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses#Historicity

              The TLDR; no mentions of Moses in Egyptian or Persian texts until about the 4th century BCE. He may have been a Hebrew specific quasi mythic figure based on a possible real person. But there’s no evidence at all.

              Which makes sense, because that’s the timeframe that the Achaemenid Empire conquered Babylon and started letting the exiles return to Judah. Exiles who compiled a new Torah from scraps they saved and from making shit up.

        • Montagge@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          19 hours ago

          The tribes of Israel were most likely Canaanites that made up the whole came in and conquered everyone in the area after being slaves story.

    • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      20 hours ago

      Their ancestors only lived there after they ethnically cleansed the people who were already living there.

      If this even happened…

  • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    22 hours ago

    “their ancestors”

    The first Jews to move to Palestine were European Jews, they can’t use the “our ancestors” card.

      • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        21 hours ago

        Yes, there have been palestinians practicing judaism for a long time.

        But that doesn’t give europeans (and africans and asians and others), regardless of their religion, the right to steal the land and genocide the people.

        In the olde days they called them crusades and they were garbage then too.

        • IceBerg@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          14 hours ago

          When you say steal land and genocide people, are you referring to the survivors from the Holocaust granted part of the british controlled land called (by the british BTW and not the indigenous people) Palestine? Those folks who we’re then immediately set upon by the arabic folk living in said land?

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        And there wasn’t a problem until the Europeans came and decided to fuck the place up.

      • bad_news@lemmy.billiam.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        18 hours ago

        “Always” when semitic monotheism didn’t exist before the 6th century BCE? When do you think the world was created?

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        20 hours ago

        See my reply to someone else, the Jews that moved to Israel after WW2 were Jews of European origin.

      • Talaraine@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        20 hours ago

        The fallacy of this never ending debate is kinda displayed when there’s stories in the bible where God tells the Jews to displace the Canaanites and take their land.

        Can we just, not?

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        30
        ·
        edit-2
        21 hours ago

        DNA tests show that their ancestors mostly have the same markers found in southern Italian or Sicilian populations.

        If a Japanese converts to Judaism, can they claim that their ancestors used to live in Israel? Well, the same logic applies to the European Jews that moved to Israel. They then convinced Jews that are actual descendants of the Levant populations to move to Israel with them, but the first settlers didn’t have Israeli ancestors, or didn’t have more of them than any other Joe Schmo from Southern Italy

        • drolex@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          21 hours ago

          Judaism is - mostly - not a religion of conversion, that’s why it’s always complicated to separate the religious aspect from the ethnic side when talking about ‘Jews’.

          Even if the ancestry is muddled in millennia of mixing with other local populations, I suppose most Jews can still claim that they descend from Israeli ancestors at some point, and it makes sense.

            • drolex@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              19 hours ago

              Or understand that remote ancestry doesn’t necessarily give you a right to some land

              • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                17 hours ago

                Ding ding ding! Right answer!

                Although I’ll be the first to admit that what happened to first Nations and indigenous populations during modern colonization is completely unfair and the reservations system is completely broken and it’s recent enough that it’s perfectly fair for them to fight it, but claiming you’re owed a piece of land because your ancestors (allegedly) got kicked out millennias ago? Nah.

                • eldavi@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  7 hours ago

                  At least they have a reservation system.

                  Native Americans south of the us-mexico border stop being native Americans once they move out of the ejidos (aka communal community and the closest thing to a reservation in Mexico) and the ultra fine gradient that separates a Mexican from a native American is too fine for the American and Canadian systems to handle.

                  It’s especially galling in my situation because DNA says I’m 75% native American but I didn’t qualify under the American system (Canadians have a similar system) which means I can never access to the healthcare, education, and housing aid due to the simple fact that Americans genocides the people I descend from them out of existence on the American side the border; but left them mostly alone on the Mexican side of the border.

          • GrammarPolice@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            21 hours ago

            Yeah, I’d be inclined to agree with your last point too. Especially when you consider the Holocaust, and how the Jews were forced to relocate or die. It’s like what do you want them to do in that situation.

            • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              20 hours ago

              It’s like what do you want them to do in that situation.

              I want them not to steal the land and genocide the people who are completely unconnected to the holocaust. Zionism was a form of fascism before WW2. It’s always been the plan to rob palestine (apart from when they wanted argentina, etc.).

              • glockenspiel@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                13 hours ago

                Are you aware of the history of the state of Israel beyond what affirms a bias? The modern state of Israel was formed after Jews around the world started purchasing land in modern day Israel. 28% of Israel was purchased this way, and that’s most of the land the original waves moved to. Arab states surrounding that 28% had a huge issue with Jews existing in that space considering every one of those nations had genocide the Jews from their borders and even aligned with Hitler during WW2 (including the Palestinians, who allied with Hitler and whose leaders were eventually sent into exile by the British for doing so).

                So, because the Arab states already had designs on the area of Palestine (they were going to annex once the British left), and they couldn’t tolerate Jews existing in the area… The Arab nations attacked. And lost, soundly. And Israel grew much, much larger. Israel seized more land by fighting off a war than anywhere else. That’s what happens when countries lose wars of aggression which they start; they lose territory. That’s what Ukraine is doing to Russia right now and they’d be foolish to ever give it back.

                But sometimes they do give some or all land back. Which Israel did. They gave a lot of the land back in exchange for peace.

                There’s no perfect entity in the world, and definitely not one in the Middle East. But please, spare us the Boogeyman one sided tales. The Jews fought for Israel so adamantly because they were exterminated from the region long before any fascist rose to power in Germany. They were forced out into diaspora several times, too. It’s all complicated and unfair and it isn’t as simple as Jews = European and don’t belong there.

                Palestinians need to bite the bullet. There are generations of people born there now and Arab states are not going to exterminate them again. So a two state solution is what they better seek unless they want to lose it all with their constant aggression. Is it ideal? No. Would it secure an actual state and begin the process of normalization? Maybe. But first they need to purge terrorists from their leadership. And that’s the real stickler considering that shit runs deep in many Arab Nation governments. The two are intertwined just like emergency companies are in the west.

              • GrammarPolice@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                20 hours ago

                Fair enough. However, i don’t know about Zionism being fascism. It’s simply Israeli nationalism. Sure, there are a few far right Zionists, but they are in the minority.

          • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            20 hours ago

            I suppose most Jews can still claim that they descend from Israeli ancestors at some point, and it makes sense.

            Just like christians, muslims, and probably the majority of people on the planet. But most convincingly the palestinians who continuously inhabited that land throughout history.

    • Allonzee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Technically the Greeks own the Earth, because Zeus has a bigger imaginary dick than Jehovah, Yaweh, Allah, Buddha or Krishna. 🤷

    • TheDonkerZ@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      18 hours ago

      I’m going to say something probably incredibly offensive, but I have the safety of my funny online username so it’s ok.

      The people are only “chosen” if you subscribe to their beliefs. If you’re insinuating that Native Americans aren’t “chosen” either, then you’ve forgotten that they actually use a picture of you in the dictionary to define “hypocrite”.

      You are allowed to question peoples’ beliefs, but you are certainly NOT allowed to take harmful action against them because they are different.

      And to be perfectly clear, I am not commenting on which side of the current conflict is entitled to what. I’m not touching that conversation with a 12ft pole.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      18 hours ago

      You say that, but . . . :

      …Throughout the 1800’s, adherents cited the current existence of the “red sons of Israel” (i.e. Native American) as evidence of the authenticity of the The Book of Mormon.

      Adherents saw Native Americans as part of God’s chosen people and they believed that preaching to them was part of the gathering of Israel which will precede the millennium. The church’s long history with Native Americans is tied to their beliefs about The Book of Mormon.  According to sociologist Marcie Goodman, historically Latter Day Saints held paternalistic beliefs about Native Americans needing help. Outreach to Native Americans became the first mission of Smith’s newly organized Church of Christ, as the purpose of The Book of Mormon was to recover the lost remnant of the ancient children of Israel (e.g. Native Americans).

    • Milk_Sheikh@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      18 hours ago

      I don’t understand this comment - are you saying they’re a higher/better people because they’re “The Chosen People”? That they deserve the land? And how is the comparison antisemitic?

  • Sop
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    22 hours ago

    This is a weird comparison. Native Americans were the victims a of horrific genocide similar to Palestinians now.

    • Knuschberkeks@leminal.space
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      69
      ·
      22 hours ago

      I understand it more in a way of “if you think Israel is morally doing the right thing, give native americans back their land.”

      • Sop
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        20 hours ago

        Native Americans should be given back their land just like Palestinians.

      • Skua@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        22 hours ago

        It becomes pretty horrible if you believe that Israel is in the wrong, though, which is probably why people don’t think it works

        • CheesyFox@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          26
          ·
          21 hours ago

          The post is literally a satire towards ones who support Israel, it shouldn’t work any other way

      • Sop
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Morality did not suddenly appear with international law and international law does not define morality now. What an ignorant take. ‘Property rights’ are made up by western colonialists to oppress indigenous peoples.

    • undergroundoverground@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      22 hours ago

      Not outside America or Israel it isn’t.

      Want to really show their hypocrisy, the UK has been in Ireland longer than white people have been in the US. I mean, what my country did in Ireland is foul and I think Irish people should have every right to choose their own future but the point still stands. Some Americans will call it imperialism, without a hint of irony or self awareness.