@Northwest Any event in war taken in isolation can look bad. I'm not saying that wasn't bad or that the IDF could have handled it differently. My point, which you seem to have missed, is that there were valid reasons for Eastern European Jews to emigrate to the area that eventually became Israel.
My point, which you seem to have missed, is that there were valid reasons for Eastern European Jews to emigrate to the area that eventually became Israel.
I didn't miss it at all, it's textbook AIPAC. What you seem to forget, is that the "European" pogroms are not only history, but they are NOT a justification for today's situation in both Gaza and the West Bank. So propagandize away.
@Northwest And the emigration of Jews to Israel is not justification for the attempts of Arabs to exterminate them. If you support that, you should also support Trump's efforts to deport Latino immigrants.
The Jewish people are entitled to self-determination in their historic homeland. If you oppose that, you're an antisemite no matter how liberal you think you are or even if some of your best friends are Jewish. And if your response is that no one is entitled to self-determination, that would include Palestinians.
@LeopoldBloom You must be the life of the party at AIPAC events.
And the emigration of Jews to Israel is not justification for the attempts of Arabs to exterminate them.
A one-sided misrepresentation of the whole situation, especially from the guy trying to justify the deaths of civilians as
Any event in war taken in isolation can look bad.
The Jewish people are entitled to self-determination in their historic homeland.
As, technically, a Scandinavian Jew, I have NO claims on real estate in the historical Levant.
Just as a reminder, it is also the local Arabs historical homeland and Arabs also have the right to self-determination. But you seem to think that Jews right to self-determination also means that Arabs are not entitled to same.
If you support that, you should also support Trump's efforts to deport Latino immigrants.
Classic AIPAC attempt to deflect from the actual issue.
If you oppose that, you're an antisemite no matter how liberal you think you are or even if some of your best friends are Jewish.
Another classic AIPAC move and another attempt to deflect from the actual issue.
Just curious, what do you think of this guy?
Ahmed Fouad Alkhatib? An American guy, who lived in Gaza for 5 years, when his father was a UN-sponsored Physician?
I think he's got the right attitude, but just as you're calling a Jew and anti-semite, other than the AIPAC outreach that informed you of his existence, you would also probably call him an anti-semite.
I wonder what might have happened to him, if he was in Gaza, on the same UN-sponsored medical mission, in 2025, not 2005? But instead of wondering, you may want to re-read the link I sent you, and ponder, instead of justifying it as nothing more than the price of war.
But for some reason, emigration to Israel should have been off the table, even though that is the historic homeland of the Jewish people.
And many did. Even the Nazis tried to encourage it and I'm sure if the US allowed it, many more would have come to the US.
[media=https://youtu.be/Tf0VOOoChrU]
There is, however, a problem when the house you emigrate to, already belongs to someone else. Which is what currently is the case in the West Bank settlements.
Trying to deflect from the current situation, by going back to European pogroms makes no less ignorant than those who try to reduce the situation through the distorted lens of so called "Israeli Colonialism" .
If he lived in Gaza right now, Hamas would have killed him before the IDF had a chance.
Oh wait, he would be dead anyway. I'm confused though, which situation is better?
But you're welcome to reframe your post as a historic discussion, otherwise you "may" appear as if you're white washing what's going on. Is Ehud Olmert an Iranian shill? he calls it a genocide.
Zohran Mamdani, who as far as I know has never been to Israel or Palestine and has no relatives there, is a hero because he refuses to participate in Holocaust commemorations and won't condemn idiotic slogans like "globalize the intifada."
A hero to whom? He doesn't mean anything to me, unless I move to New York city, and he's elected Mayor. He got 20% of the Jewish vote, despite AIPAC and its allies spending millions trying to prevent Mamdani from winning.
Globalizing the Intifada, is a very alarming term, given that it's been subverted by the likes of Arafat, Hamas and Iran and its proxies, and the Islamist collective, as opposed to the original idea, which was a move by the Christian Mayors of the West Bank that meant "no representation no taxation".
Mandani has been meeting with Jewish leaders and business leaders this week, and I believe be may be making a lengthy public statement to clarify his position.
Your parents or grandparents went to Scandinavia.
They ended up in San Mateo, helping birth the organization that eventually sponsored Khatib to come to the US, as a 15-year old.
If you refuse to make any effort to understand Israeli history and how they arrived at where they are today
Newsflash: don't try to mansplain Israeli to me. You will embarrass yourself, and don't distract from what's happening by revisiting the pogroms to the guy whose existence is their end result. Perhaps you should live in Israel for a while, and just like Khatib, try to understand that there are other viewpoints, not just your pogrom-bounded history. Try, for instance, follow the example set by Khatib.
@Northwest I actually agree with Alkhatib on most of his points. He holds both sides accountable, the only constructive position as this won't be solved by just Israel and the Palestinians. I would only add that any lasting peace will require the buy-in of the surrounding countries, most of which aside from Iran have moved on from "we will push the Jews into the sea." The Oct. 7 attack may have been timed to derail the increasing rapprochement between Israel and Saudi Arabia, which it did. Meanwhile, the Iranian leadership has made hatred of Israel and the Jewish people one of its main positions. And before you tell me "but Jews live in Iran," synagogues and Jewish schools must be supervised by Muslims, and the Hebrew language is illegal. Of course, they're automatically the good guys because Israel and the US just attacked them.
I am also against the West Bank settlements as they are one of the obstacles to a Palestinian state. As far as accusing me of not seeing both sides, that's hilarious. Your posts are far more one-sided; I don't recall anything from you on this issue beyond "look at the horrible thing the IDF did." Here's my summary of the main obstacles to a Palestinian state.
Mamdani is in a difficult position, as his support comes as much from antizionists as it does from people who like his ideas for reforming the police, housing, and transportation. If he moderates his views on Israel, he runs the risk of a significant portion of his supporters concluding that he "sold out."
I can't comment on Ehud Ohmert's position, but calling this war a "genocide" is cheapening the term for its emotional effect, same as when pro-lifers call abortion "baby murder." That being said, I don't live in Israel and am not qualified to opine on the internal discussion there which is very different from what it is in the rest of the world.
I can't comment on Ehud Ohmert's position, but calling this war a "genocide" is cheapening the term for its emotional effect
Consider that he was Israel's Prime Minister. If you like Alkhatib's position, then you may be interested in knowing that Mandani's position is pretty similar.
I don't know who you're referring to when you say that they award a good guy label only if Israel attacks them. As in, I don't know who "they" are. But dying in a war does not make one a good guy. Did they cheat on their taxes? Do they cut lines? Do they kick their dog?
There are plenty of things that make someone a good person, but dying in a war is not one of them. However, despite of how good they are, a family of 13, dying needlessly, are "victims".
The October 7th attack may have been timed to derail the Saudi-Israeli talks, but I really doubt it. Hamas has no end game. They do it for the sake of waging war, and the more Palestinians die, the better Hamas thinks it looks. Their ONLY end game, is a total domination of Jerusalem, and this dove tails into Iran's Ayatollah's end game.
I do, however, and for obvious reasons, expect Israel to behave differently. If you read Haaertz, I can try to link to one of their OpEds, where they refer to the Netanyahu plan for Gaza as a "Concentration Camp".
I continue to shake my head at some of the Jewish USA diaspora's complicity and willingness to look the other way, just because they don't want to look in the mirror.
So who do you think made Hamas powerful?
Netanyahu had his trial suspended, again, because he said he needs to deal with the crisis in Syria, where government forces are duking it out with the Druze.
