Is all criticism of Israel antisemitic?

[Gormwood]

Israel is the best thing to happen to the Middle East in the entirety of the 20th and (so far) the 21st century. Jewish people have proven to be very capable leaders and all religions alike enjoy considerable freedoms in the State of Israel, especially compared to other countries around it. Characterization of Palestine being under "Apartheid" is not only categorically false, but also primarily driven by anti-Semitic sentiment. If Palestine were fully integrated with Israel, Muslims would be much better off and would have considerably more civil and economic freedom.

Which will never happen because the Israeli Jews do not want to lose their majority.

[Omonros]

No-however there is an important extension to the argument; I am pro-Palestine, and that does not mean I am a radical Wahhabi nor an anti-Semite. I believe in the tolerance of all peoples and faiths, and within that I fail to see the purpose of Israel.
As many have also said, it is still important to mind the gap-which happens to be full of trolls. Many anti-Semites are the loudest voices of the anti-Israel discussions so it is very important to mind who you associate with and what they truly believe.

_{also I feel the need to confirm to anyone who wants to respond this that this is not the thread to discuss Palestine nor Wahhabism. I believe we have other threads for that, and if not, you have the freedom to make one.}

If you fail to see the purpose of Israel then why do you see the purpose for a Palestinian Arab state?

Because, to its core, Israel was created to be a religious-based nation with strong underlies of seeking the grand goal of being an ethnostate. Judaism did not and does not require a nation to call its own, as can be said for any religion. And if it were a nation for an ethnicity, that is just further proof that the nation is no more than an ethnostate created for the sole purpose of helping a people whose oppression and extermination had, for the most part, ended. Sure, there were plenty of people in other nations who had violent anti-semitic views, but those nations created Israel. Palestine does not prove to want this. From what I have seen the majority of Palestine and Palestinians want a nation in which they are included. I do not see that in Israel and so I refuse to support its existence when there is hope for something better. If Palestine does not prove to be a better choice then I would accept that I am wrong and support reform or dissolution once again-but I do not believe that would be the case and so I support the creation of the state.

[Modu]

I am kosher as can be.

Hello Brother,
Are you Jewish? If so, shalom alechim. One question: why do you support an oppressive “state”?

Nope, not Jewish at all. Just would much rather live in Israel than anywhere else in the Middle East. I don't see how it is oppressive in the slightest compared to the countries around it.

[Haeresia]

Because, to its core, Israel was created to be a religious-based nation with strong underlies of seeking the grand goal of being an ethnostate.

Zionism was originally an entirely nationalistic affair which wanted to establish a state for the Jewish people, not religion. They believed that they were persecuted to the extent that they realized that Jews need their own state. The early Zionists sought solutions not only in then-Palestine, but all in Uganda.

Judaism did not and does not require a nation to call its own, as can be said for any religion. And if it were a nation for an ethnicity, that is just further proof that the nation is no more than an ethnostate created for the sole purpose of helping a people whose oppression and extermination had, for the most part, ended.

Judaism didn't, but the Jews definitely did, and the Holocaust proves that. It's a nation for a particular nation, much like Estonia, Japan, Mongolia, or Spain. Modern ethnostates are nothing to be mad about.

Sure, there were plenty of people in other nations who had violent anti-semitic views, but those nations created Israel.

Where's the argument here?

Palestine does not prove to want this. From what I have seen the majority of Palestine and Palestinians want a nation in which they are included. I do not see that in Israel and so I refuse to support its existence when there is hope for something better. If Palestine does not prove to be a better choice then I would accept that I am wrong and support reform or dissolution once again-but I do not believe that would be the case and so I support the creation of the state.

This is a problem that should be addressed. The current situation in the West Bank and Gaza cannot go on, it is simply inhumane and rather absurd. On this we can agree. But Israel, as a Jewish ethnostate, has a point and cannot be simply dismissed; philosophizing it into non-existence isn't going to solve anything at all. Having the West bank and Gaza form their own state may work, but its failure is not unprecedented.

[Novus America]

If you fail to see the purpose of Israel then why do you see the purpose for a Palestinian Arab state?

Because, to its core, Israel was created to be a religious-based nation with strong underlies of seeking the grand goal of being an ethnostate. Judaism did not and does not require a nation to call its own, as can be said for any religion. And if it were a nation for an ethnicity, that is just further proof that the nation is no more than an ethnostate created for the sole purpose of helping a people whose oppression and extermination had, for the most part, ended. Sure, there were plenty of people in other nations who had violent anti-semitic views, but those nations created Israel. Palestine does not prove to want this. From what I have seen the majority of Palestine and Palestinians want a nation in which they are included. I do not see that in Israel and so I refuse to support its existence when there is hope for something better. If Palestine does not prove to be a better choice then I would accept that I am wrong and support reform or dissolution once again-but I do not believe that would be the case and so I support the creation of the state.

But this is still confused. You are against ethnostates but want another one? A Palestinian Arab state would also be an ethnostate.
And it is not an either/or thing. You can support both the Israelis and Palestinian Arabs having their own state. Which makes far more sense.

And opposing the existence of Israel now is crazy because what happens to the people already living there?

[Omonros]

Because, to its core, Israel was created to be a religious-based nation with strong underlies of seeking the grand goal of being an ethnostate. Judaism did not and does not require a nation to call its own, as can be said for any religion. And if it were a nation for an ethnicity, that is just further proof that the nation is no more than an ethnostate created for the sole purpose of helping a people whose oppression and extermination had, for the most part, ended. Sure, there were plenty of people in other nations who had violent anti-semitic views, but those nations created Israel. Palestine does not prove to want this. From what I have seen the majority of Palestine and Palestinians want a nation in which they are included. I do not see that in Israel and so I refuse to support its existence when there is hope for something better. If Palestine does not prove to be a better choice then I would accept that I am wrong and support reform or dissolution once again-but I do not believe that would be the case and so I support the creation of the state.

But this is still confused. You are against ethnostates but want another one? A Palestinian Arab state would also be an ethnostate.
And it is not an either/or thing. You can support both the Israelis and Palestinian Arabs having their own state. Which makes far more sense.

And opposing the existence of Israel now is crazy because what happens to the people already living there?

I do not support ethnostates at all. They have all proven destined for a path of violent and racist views if allowed to maintain their status by other nations as a place for a 'helpless' people in the past-these examples stretch from (typically) originally nationalist creating radical, reactionary governments like what occurred in Hungary-of course, with assistance from the Nazis. To put it shortly; I believe that Palestine, if it would remain at the side of what I have seen as the core of its belief, would derail Israel's decent into a racist nation of epic proportions, which from the abuses and rights violations I have heard of in Israel to the Palestinian Arab people, seems to be a path the people have-and thus in time the nation would-take. I should emphasize that if Palestine took a similar path in time I would quickly revoke my support and seek reform, or total replacement of the nation. It may not be the bet that everyone is taking but I have come to believe it might be the best one.

Because, to its core, Israel was created to be a religious-based nation with strong underlies of seeking the grand goal of being an ethnostate.

Zionism was originally an entirely nationalistic affair which wanted to establish a state for the Jewish people, not religion. They believed that they were persecuted to the extent that they realized that Jews need their own state. The early Zionists sought solutions not only in then-Palestine, but all in Uganda.

Judaism did not and does not require a nation to call its own, as can be said for any religion. And if it were a nation for an ethnicity, that is just further proof that the nation is no more than an ethnostate created for the sole purpose of helping a people whose oppression and extermination had, for the most part, ended.

Judaism didn't, but the Jews definitely did, and the Holocaust proves that. It's a nation for a particular nation, much like Estonia, Japan, Mongolia, or Spain. Modern ethnostates are nothing to be mad about.

That first part I don't clearly understand. Were Jewish people suffering in Uganda as well, or were they seeking to create an Israeli state in Uganda? And, yes, I understand they wanted it for the people, but all the same I see that as an ethnostate and nothing more-which I will stand against to the last straw.
As for the second part, all of those examples are nations in which a single people have lived for millenia with the exception of Spain. They are not ethnostates in the same capacity as Israel-they are nations formed by a people, not for them at the expense of another-with the exception of Spain, which was, to my understanding, no more than a small assortment of states in northern Iberia until the Reconquista, in which they invaded Andalusian land. I do not know for certain who was there first, though if Al-Andalus was a nation of conquest that displaced or oppressed the native people then they had all that right, and if not, it would not be a nation I smile upon the history of, but that is a different situation and a different discussion that does not belong here.
Further, I believe the Holocaust a terrible tragedy as much as anyone else, but that was too long ago to justify a still-existing views that could easily sour in time. Yes, the Jewish people were in great need after the Holocaust and there is no arguing that-they just got out of a systematic extermination crisis and are now poor, sick, starving, homeless, and deeply traumatized. They needed aid and rehabilitation from everyone with space and resources to spare-which a rapidly industrializing Western world still emptying their savings accounts from the riches of their ruthless colonialism could easily provide. What they did not need is a nation of their own for permanent residence in a region historically hostile to their people-right on top of not only a region in which many Arab people already lived destining them for the exact situation they are in now in one way or another, but including Jerusalem, one of the arguably most hotly contested cities in history. What I'm trying to say here is that, yes, the displaced and just-freed Jewish people needed a safe place to live, but the land we now know as not a necessary choice by any means.

Sure, there were plenty of people in other nations who had violent anti-semitic views, but those nations created Israel.

Where's the argument here?

Palestine does not prove to want this. From what I have seen the majority of Palestine and Palestinians want a nation in which they are included. I do not see that in Israel and so I refuse to support its existence when there is hope for something better. If Palestine does not prove to be a better choice then I would accept that I am wrong and support reform or dissolution once again-but I do not believe that would be the case and so I support the creation of the state.

This is a problem that should be addressed. The current situation in the West Bank and Gaza cannot go on, it is simply inhumane and rather absurd. On this we can agree. But Israel, as a Jewish ethnostate, has a point and cannot be simply dismissed; philosophizing it into non-existence isn't going to solve anything at all. Having the West bank and Gaza form their own state may work, but its failure is not unprecedented.

My argument in saying the first quote is that the people of those nations would have likely learned to abandon their views given the extension of gratitude. There is no guarantee to that and plenty of possible examples to say otherwise, but that would have been a far better and safer gamble than the massive gamble that was Israel. Besides, after the war was over I doubt anyone would be stupid enough to do anything even similar to what had happened under Nazi rule. If anything, I would expect the vast majority of people to have great sympathy for the horrors they had just endured. Now that the memory of the horrors of the Holocaust has faded somewhat it may be less apparent now, but at the time I doubt people would have dared to hold the views that had just caused the death of millions.
As for the second part, I agree to a point. Yes, there is a great need to end the conflict and it is getting to a point that it's becoming rather trivial but there is still the chance for Israel to corrupt its aging viewpoints and creating two states is absolutely destined for disaster. Not only is there the Jerusalem/Al-Quds issue, there is also the inevitability of intense conflict between the two nations. The states are vying to be recognized as the absolute authority of the region and if they were both to exist, in the same area, with neither being granted total control of the region, there is no way to stop the inevitability of intense rivalry and the possibility of a very, very bloody war that could easily include far more than just Israel and Palestine. I'm talking a third world war. I have supported many gambles in my argument but the diplomatic situation of the entire planet is not one I am willing to risk. I do not believe there is a perfect solution, but that is not one we could risk in the face of just how much could-and most likely would-go wrong.

[Fahran]

Which will never happen because the Israeli Jews do not want to lose their majority.

For good reason.

[Gormwood]

Which will never happen because the Israeli Jews do not want to lose their majority.

For good reason.

So they will be relegated to an underclass with the ideal of ethnically cleansing them.

[Modu]

For good reason.

So they will be relegated to an underclass with the ideal of ethnically cleansing them.

I don't approve of ethnic cleansing whatsoever, but... Wouldn't you choose living in Israel without suffrage versus say... Saudi Arabia? I just find it hard to believe people here would not support Israel, even Muslims. Quality of life in Israel, along with civil rights, is way, way, better than the Islamic countries around it.

And looking at Islam, Muslim-majority countries are some of the least religiously tolerant countries in the world. Israel accepts the existence of Palestinians, the same cannot be said for how the other side views Israel.

[Omonros]

For good reason.

So they will be relegated to an underclass with the ideal of ethnically cleansing them.

I'm pretty sure advocating for ethnic cleansing is against site rules...Unless I'm misreading this?

[Gormwood]

So they will be relegated to an underclass with the ideal of ethnically cleansing them.

I'm pretty sure advocating for ethnic cleansing is against site rules...Unless I'm misreading this?

Israel rendering the Palestinians an underclass that they wish they could ethnically cleanse? Netanyahu said he's waiting for U.S. blessing to annex the West Bank.

[Fahran]

Israel rendering the Palestinians an underclass that they wish they could ethnically cleanse? Netanyahu said he's waiting for U.S. blessing to annex the West Bank.

Israel does not protect Palestinians because they're not Israeli citizens, unlike Israeli Arabs. They're not an underclass. They're simply not Israelis. Ethnic cleansing is still bad, mind you, but that's an issue in the Disputed Territories.

[Insaanistan]

Netanyahu says that Palestine doesn’t exist, but also blames it for the Holocaust.

[Nakena]

Netanyahu says that Palestine doesn’t exist, but also blames it for the Holocaust.

Netanyahu basically said Hitler did nothing wrong.

[North German Realm]

Netanyahu says that Palestine doesn’t exist, but also blames it for the Holocaust.

Netanyahu basically said Hitler did nothing wrong.

Source?
Also, I mean the Mufti of Jerusalem (potentially one of the early theoreticians of what would years later become the Palestinian Identity) was at least partially responsible for the Holocaust.

[Fenhamstan]

Nuttywarjew makes Hitler look like a choirboy.

[Insaanistan]

Netanyahu basically said Hitler did nothing wrong.

Source?
Also, I mean the Mufti of Jerusalem (potentially one of the early theoreticians of what would years later become the Palestinian Identity) was at least partially responsible for the Holocaust.

Dude, you just Muslims so much you want to shift the blame to us (not that I like the Mufti). Hitler developed his anti-Semitism long before meeting the Mufti, and to say that the Mufti is in anyway responsible is ludicrous. It was Hitler’s idea, and Hitler choice.

Also, when will you give the “proof” that I lied about Islam?

[Nakena]

Netanyahu basically said Hitler did nothing wrong.

Source?
Also, I mean the Mufti of Jerusalem (potentially one of the early theoreticians of what would years later become the Palestinian Identity) was at least partially responsible for the Holocaust.

Sauces:
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/net ... -1.5411578
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-34594563

[Farnhamia]

Nuttywarjew makes Hitler look like a choirboy.

*** Warned for trolling (political nicknaming). ***

[Farnhamia]

Israel is the best thing to happen to the Middle East in the entirety of the 20th and (so far) the 21st century. Jewish people have proven to be very capable leaders and all religions alike enjoy considerable freedoms in the State of Israel, especially compared to other countries around it. Characterization of Palestine being under "Apartheid" is not only categorically false, but also primarily driven by anti-Semitic sentiment. If Palestine were fully integrated with Israel, Muslims would be much better off and would have considerably more civil and economic freedom.

Hello Brother,
Are you okay? Your statement makes we genuinely concerned for your mental health.

*** Warned for flaming. ***

Do not go making statements regarding the mental health of other posters.

[West Leas Oros 2]

Criticizing the abuses and actions of a regime is remarkably different from smearing an ethnic group.

[Bear Stearns]

Was the boycott movement against apartheid South Africa motivated by anti-Afrikaner sentiment?

[Fahran]

Was the boycott movement against apartheid South Africa motivated by anti-Afrikaner sentiment?

Completely different rhetoric and attitudes behind it usually.

[Fahran]

Dude, you just Muslims so much you want to shift the blame to us (not that I like the Mufti). Hitler developed his anti-Semitism long before meeting the Mufti, and to say that the Mufti is in anyway responsible is ludicrous. It was Hitler’s idea, and Hitler choice.

Also, when will you give the “proof” that I lied about Islam?

The Mufti was a Nazi collaborator. He produced Nazi propaganda and aided recruitment efforts among Bosniaks. He also knew about the Final Solution and spoke giddily about how World War II had exacted a greater toll on Jews than on Germans. He even advised that Arabs should adapt a Final Solution. He was one of many architects behind the genocide. I do not believe that all Muslims or all Palestinians are culpable for the Holocaust but some did play a role in facilitating atrocities, war crimes, and human rights violations and the Mufti could very well have been put on trial and hanged if and when convicted.

[Pilipinas and Malaya]

Netanyahu says that Palestine doesn’t exist, but also blames it for the Holocaust.

Netanyahu basically said Hitler did nothing wrong.

For being a leader of the nationstate of Israel, the only Jewish-based nationstate in the world, this is a rather absurd statement to make.