What has Israel ever done for us?

[Salus Maior]

Population transfers are also ethnic cleansing.

It's almost as if ethnic nationalism is pure cancer that simply destroys all relationships between peoples who have been neighbors for centuries.

Ethnic nationalism is a protective measure in the case of Zionism. I would be a lot more considerate of the viewpoint that Jews should cease to pursue their own nation-state if we could have been accepted as something other than foreigners and villains consistently at any point prior to 1960. Euros and Arabs don't get to demand that Jews put down their sword after centuries of storming into the Jewish quarters with torches and pitch forks, after centuries of subjugation, jizya, and inquisition, and after centuries of not treating us as equals. The notion that such an outcome is just relies wholly on us putting good faith in local Gentiles to behave when they're not even behaving right now.

The suffering of Palestinians is unfortunate and tragic, but I wholly appreciate why Jewish people living in Israel has no intention of allowing their neighbors to ever get the upper hand or even have an unearned moment of respite. Because they don't expect to ever be given the same mercy, consideration, or courtesy.

This of course being along the same lines of thought as the Turks on the eve of 1915. As well as every genocidal power that's existed in the modern age, including the ones which victimized your people in particular. The destruction of another people, particularly those perceived to be a threat to the dominant peoples' status, goes hand in hand with ethnic nationalism.

And I have no problem believing that, if international observation were to suddenly be removed from the picture, that the IDF would absolutely slaughter minorities en masse. The rhetoric and sentiment are already there, all we need is a major enough war and there will be a Israeli conducted holocaust.

[Fahran]

This of course being along the same lines of thought as the Turks on the eve of 1915. As well as every genocidal power that's existed in the modern age, including the ones which victimized your people in particular. The destruction of another people, particularly those perceived to be a threat to the dominant peoples' status, goes hand in hand with ethnic nationalism.

The majority of Germans weren't put into train cars and shipped off to be exterminated. The majority of Turks didn't have all their wealth seized with the proclamation that they could convert to Islam, die, or leave. Jewish people have had that happen to us several times to the point that every single one of us has ancestors who probably survived three or four attempted ethnic cleansings. There are plenty of my fellow countrymen who still manage to believe that I'm a foreigner because of my Jewishness. They're not the majority, but they're still in the background. There's a darn good reason Israel exists and Zionists aren't willing to budge on the issue.

And I have no problem believing that, if international observation were to suddenly be removed from the picture, that the IDF would absolutely slaughter minorities en masse. The rhetoric and sentiment are already there, all we need is a major enough war and there will be a Israeli conducted holocaust.

Given that the massacres at Deir Yassin were stopped in part by Jewish settlers harassing the Lehi and calling them murderers and that a significant portion of the Israeli public actually routinely criticizes human rights abuses in the West Bank and Gaza (literally published in Haaretz on a routine basis), I'm skeptical of that. Even Meir Kahane didn't advocate full-on mass murder. He advocated ethnic cleansing through transferance to Jordan, which was still stupid and immoral, but not what you're suggesting. And the Knesset banned him for being racist.

[Fahran]

The US had a direct hand in the rise of Islamic extremism, salafism, and the backing of the Wahabi Saudi Arabia, and any American denying it is either a product of US propaganda drilled into Americans since they're kids, or is an apologist of US imperialism.

I would recommend reading Sayyid Qutb, Osama bin Laden, and Ayatollah Khomeini. The US did play a role, as did the British, French, and Soviets notably, but the role was largely indirect. A lot of modern Islamism was shaped by colonialism, communism, nationalism and neoliberalism, specifically in how it provided an alternative hegemonic model to these prior global systems.

[Punished UMN]

"Other states commit crimes against humanity so there's nothing wrong with this one doing it" is a pretty low moral bar.

Not the argument that was made. I don't believe states should engage in ethnic cleansing as a rule, though population transfers may be warranted to ensure mutual statehood at times. I simply find the notion of abolishing Israel because it engaged in apartheid and ethnic cleansing a touch strange when every Arab nation, including Palestine, is no less guilty. Or should I ask where they've hidden their Jews, Assyrians, Berbers, and Kurds? It feels like an attempt to rob Jews of self-determination and the one measure of protection they have in the region, and I have no reason to treat that as a good faith argument. Israelis have very, very good reasons for not wanting to be incorporated into a non-Jewish state, largely because non-Jewish states tend to have a bad track record on treating us like human beings. And that's been in the last century, so it's hardly ancient history.

I'm not calling for the abolition of Israel but for it to cease its ethnic cleansing. You've repeatedly defended ethnic cleansing as being necessary for the security of Israel.

[Novokria]

Not the argument that was made. I don't believe states should engage in ethnic cleansing as a rule, though population transfers may be warranted to ensure mutual statehood at times. I simply find the notion of abolishing Israel because it engaged in apartheid and ethnic cleansing a touch strange when every Arab nation, including Palestine, is no less guilty. Or should I ask where they've hidden their Jews, Assyrians, Berbers, and Kurds? It feels like an attempt to rob Jews of self-determination and the one measure of protection they have in the region, and I have no reason to treat that as a good faith argument. Israelis have very, very good reasons for not wanting to be incorporated into a non-Jewish state, largely because non-Jewish states tend to have a bad track record on treating us like human beings. And that's been in the last century, so it's hardly ancient history.

I'm not calling for the abolition of Israel but for it to cease its ethnic cleansing. You've repeatedly defended ethnic cleansing as being necessary for the security of Israel.

There is no ethnic cleansing there are more Arabs in Israel now than last year lol

[Punished UMN]

Seems pretty dishonest to say that you oppose the settlement and ethnic cleansing policy when your only response when we suggest that Israel stop it be "No, we can't let the Gentiles have a moment of respite."

[Neutraligon]

Seems pretty dishonest to say that you oppose the settlement and ethnic cleansing policy when your only response when we suggest that Israel stop it be "No, we can't let the Gentiles have a moment of respite."

While I agree that Israeli (not Jewish, Israeli) settlements and contracts should end in the West Bank and Gaza, something also needs to be done about the terrorist attacks from Palestinian side of things.

[Punished UMN]

Seems pretty dishonest to say that you oppose the settlement and ethnic cleansing policy when your only response when we suggest that Israel stop it be "No, we can't let the Gentiles have a moment of respite."

While I agree that Israeli (not Jewish, Israeli) settlements and contracts should end in the West Bank and Gaza, something also needs to be done about the terrorist attacks from Palestinian side of things.

How many terrorist attacks have been launched from the West Bank, into de jure Israeli territory?

[Fahran]

I'm not calling for the abolition of Israel but for it to cease its ethnic cleansing. You've repeatedly defended ethnic cleansing as being necessary for the security of Israel.

I agree with that then.

And let me clarify my position a bit. I stated that Israel engaged in ethnic cleansing as a matter of national security rather than as a matter of simply hating the Palestinians, and I believe that's an accurate assessment. I didn't state that ethnic cleansing as it has been practiced was moral or worth defending from a moral standpoint. In terms of ethnic cleansing, I would support population transfers following the establishment of an actualized and sovereign Palestinian state with definable borders, specifically on a voluntary basis or with compensation given and in both directions. I do not think Israel should be expelling people from their homes at the moment. And I don't even think the Nakba was a moral thing. And I apologize if my statements made it sound like I did.

[Neutraligon]

While I agree that Israeli (not Jewish, Israeli) settlements and contracts should end in the West Bank and Gaza, something also needs to be done about the terrorist attacks from Palestinian side of things.

How many terrorist attacks have been launched from the West Bank, into de jure Israeli territory?

Not sure but I know that in 2019 more then 1000 rocket shells from Gaza into Israel where launched. Apparently there where attacks on Israeli's living in the West Bank.

[Fahran]

Seems pretty dishonest to say that you oppose the settlement and ethnic cleansing policy when your only response when we suggest that Israel stop it be "No, we can't let the Gentiles have a moment of respite."

I mean... the argument wasn't that Israel should cease its settlement policy. I would have agreed otherwise. It was that Zionism was immoral or that Israel should be abolished. I don't accept either of those arguments for very obvious reasons.

[Punished UMN]

How many terrorist attacks have been launched from the West Bank, into de jure Israeli territory?

Not sure but I know that in 2019 more then 1000 rocket shells from Gaza into Israel where launched.

That's the thing though, Gaza and the West Bank have separate governments and administrations, but Israel treats them both with the same hostility. Gaza does launch rocket attacks, the West Bank doesn't; however, it's the West Bank that gets the brunt of Israeli military attacks.

[Fahran]

There is no ethnic cleansing there are more Arabs in Israel now than last year lol

Um, so there absolutely was ethnic cleansing in the West Bank.

[Neutraligon]

Not sure but I know that in 2019 more then 1000 rocket shells from Gaza into Israel where launched.

That's the thing though, Gaza and the West Bank have separate governments and administrations, but Israel treats them both with the same hostility. Gaza does launch rocket attacks, the West Bank doesn't; however, it's the West Bank that gets the brunt of Israeli military attacks.

And how much of that is due to the fact that Israel does have some say in the West Bank and actually enters there in counter-terrorism related things? If you want to call them separate goverments then maybe do not call them under one name (Palestine)

[Russiyskaya Respublica]

That's the thing though, Gaza and the West Bank have separate governments and administrations, but Israel treats them both with the same hostility. Gaza does launch rocket attacks, the West Bank doesn't; however, it's the West Bank that gets the brunt of Israeli military attacks.

And how much of that is due to the fact that Israel does have some say in the West Bank and actually enters there in counter-terrorism related things? If you want to call them separate goverments then maybe do not call them under one name (Palestine)

The reason Israel is more active in the West Bank is because of settlements rather than terrorist activity, under our current government Palestinians are a good scapegoat for many a trouble.

[Novokria]

There is no ethnic cleansing there are more Arabs in Israel now than last year lol

Um, so there absolutely was ethnic cleansing in the West Bank.

No you are a lie teller i do not believe you there is no proof

[Pope Saint Peter the Apostle]

Um, so there absolutely was ethnic cleansing in the West Bank.

No you are a lie teller i do not believe you there is no proof

There was ethnic cleansing. Which is unsurprising given that ethnic cleansing was commonly accepted as a just and necessary tool at the time.

[Gongsi]

Um, so there absolutely was ethnic cleansing in the West Bank.

No you are a lie teller i do not believe you there is no proof

I don't think there is a single decently-sized nation out there that hasn't committed atrocities like ethnic cleansing. Everyone has blood on their hands.

[Salus Maior]

This of course being along the same lines of thought as the Turks on the eve of 1915. As well as every genocidal power that's existed in the modern age, including the ones which victimized your people in particular. The destruction of another people, particularly those perceived to be a threat to the dominant peoples' status, goes hand in hand with ethnic nationalism.

The majority of Germans weren't put into train cars and shipped off to be exterminated. The majority of Turks didn't have all their wealth seized with the proclamation that they could convert to Islam, die, or leave. Jewish people have had that happen to us several times to the point that every single one of us has ancestors who probably survived three or four attempted ethnic cleansings. There are plenty of my fellow countrymen who still manage to believe that I'm a foreigner because of my Jewishness. They're not the majority, but they're still in the background. There's a darn good reason Israel exists and Zionists aren't willing to budge on the issue.

And I have no problem believing that, if international observation were to suddenly be removed from the picture, that the IDF would absolutely slaughter minorities en masse. The rhetoric and sentiment are already there, all we need is a major enough war and there will be a Israeli conducted holocaust.

Given that the massacres at Deir Yassin were stopped in part by Jewish settlers harassing the Lehi and calling them murderers and that a significant portion of the Israeli public actually routinely criticizes human rights abuses in the West Bank and Gaza (literally published in Haaretz on a routine basis), I'm skeptical of that. Even Meir Kahane didn't advocate full-on mass murder. He advocated ethnic cleansing through transferance to Jordan, which was still stupid and immoral, but not what you're suggesting. And the Knesset banned him for being racist.

The Armenians were also survivors of a genocide, they still exterminated the Azeri inhabitants of Khojaly in the 90's. Being a survivor of genocide doesn't mean that they're immune from developing a genocidal nationalism. In fact, both Armenia and Israel are examples of the victims of ethnonationalism coming embracing the very thing that victimized them in the first place, and passing on that victimhood to others.

What indicates a structure that's prone to genocidal ideology is a structure which is constructed for the elevation and privilege of a certain ethnic group (well, not just ethnic group but we're talking ethnonationalism here) over other ethnic groups. The reason for which doesn't really matter, because whether you're building the state to protect an ethnicity or because of some concept that they're the ubermensh, it's still the same end. The state exists to establish one ethnicity's status above others, and keep that status secure.

All it takes for the state to be merely tolerating the presence of a minority to outright destroying and depriving them is the perception that they're dangerous to the ruling group's status and privilege. This has been the case in every genocide that happened on the basis of ethnic-nationalism. Israel has that structure and potential. Hell, the guy who coined the term "genocide", Zygmunt Bauman, who was a Polish Jew who was involved in WWII, left Israel after a few years living there because of its nationalism.

There were Germans who weren't a fan of the Nazis' anti-Semitic policies as well earlier on in their attempts to assert themselves. This is also true in Turkey in the Armenian genocide. That there's detractors doesn't really fill me with any more confidence in Israel, particularly when nothing is actually stopping the IDF from bulldozing homes and the expansion of settlements, as well as the impressment of Israeli rights over other inhabitants of their patrimony and occupied territories.

[Guatemalan Corsica]

Isreal has done some s

[The Emerald Legion]

This is a legitimate inquiry. Virtually the whole body of our (American) foreign policy in the Middle East, i.e. towards over one billion Muslims, is based on the interests of Israel. We have even recently recognized Moroccan sovereignty over the Western Sahara, the same issue over which they were made to leave the African Union, in exchange for their recognition of Israel. All of the Iran nonsense over the past years would not have been a blip on our radar were it not for our ties and action on behalf of Israel. We would not need to be in Afghanistan, or Iraq, or Syria, if it were not for the flaming resentment these Islamic extremists hold for us due to our incessant support for Israel.

Therefore why should an American politician, whose first interest in foreign policy was America, and not some other goal or allegiance, wish to remain so aligned to Israel as we are?

I'm confused. You make them offering us excuses to invade the shit out of places sound like it's a bad thing.

[Fahran]

The Armenians were also survivors of a genocide, they still exterminated the Azeri inhabitants of Khojaly in the 90's. Being a survivor of genocide doesn't mean that they're immune from developing a genocidal nationalism. In fact, both Armenia and Israel are examples of the victims of ethnonationalism coming embracing the very thing that victimized them in the first place, and passing on that victimhood to others.

The Khojaly Massacre was an injustice. I have no intention of denying that. The conflict to unify Nargorno-Karabakh with Armenia, on the other hand, had a sound moral basis with regard to principles of self-determination. It is also not outrageous for them to seek self-determination in light of the fact that ethnic cleansing has been practiced by the Azeri government at intermittent intervals.

What indicates a structure that's prone to genocidal ideology is a structure which is constructed for the elevation and privilege of a certain ethnic group (well, not just ethnic group but we're talking ethnonationalism here) over other ethnic groups. The reason for which doesn't really matter, because whether you're building the state to protect an ethnicity or because of some concept that they're the ubermensh, it's still the same end. The state exists to establish one ethnicity's status above others, and keep that status secure.

The issue here is that, in the absence of nationalism for groups like the Jews, Armenians, Poles, and Greeks, we continue to observe the formation of ethnic hierarchies and often undue favoritism to limited interests. The fact of the matter is that people have often fundamentally divergent conventions, values, and experiences and nationalism represents one way of allowing those to find adequate expression and exercise through the nation-state.

All it takes for the state to be merely tolerating the presence of a minority to outright destroying and depriving them is the perception that they're dangerous to the ruling group's status and privilege. This has been the case in every genocide that happened on the basis of ethnic-nationalism. Israel has that structure and potential. Hell, the guy who coined the term "genocide", Zygmunt Bauman, who was a Polish Jew who was involved in WWII, left Israel after a few years living there because of its nationalism.

He may well have left. The issue is that innocent Jewish blood has soaked the streets of the Maghreb and watered the grasses of the Eurasian Steppe since before nationalism was in vogue. At the time of Israel's establishment, those pogroms and massacres were still ongoing. The Europeans and Americans have decided to treat Jews as equals in the past fifty years is not much of an assurance when we look even a bit behind the curtain.

There were Germans who weren't a fan of the Nazis' anti-Semitic policies as well earlier on in their attempts to assert themselves. This is also true in Turkey in the Armenian genocide. That there's detractors doesn't really fill me with any more confidence in Israel, particularly when nothing is actually stopping the IDF from bulldozing homes and the expansion of settlements, as well as the impressment of Israeli rights over other inhabitants of their patrimony and occupied territories.

The issue is that the alternative you proposed isn't realistic.

[Punished UMN]

The Armenians were also survivors of a genocide, they still exterminated the Azeri inhabitants of Khojaly in the 90's. Being a survivor of genocide doesn't mean that they're immune from developing a genocidal nationalism. In fact, both Armenia and Israel are examples of the victims of ethnonationalism coming embracing the very thing that victimized them in the first place, and passing on that victimhood to others.

The Khojaly Massacre was an injustice. I have no intention of denying that. The conflict to unify Nargorno-Karabakh with Armenia, on the other hand, had a sound moral basis with regard to principles of self-determination. It is also not outrageous for them to seek self-determination in light of the fact that ethnic cleansing has been practiced by the Azeri government at intermittent intervals.

What indicates a structure that's prone to genocidal ideology is a structure which is constructed for the elevation and privilege of a certain ethnic group (well, not just ethnic group but we're talking ethnonationalism here) over other ethnic groups. The reason for which doesn't really matter, because whether you're building the state to protect an ethnicity or because of some concept that they're the ubermensh, it's still the same end. The state exists to establish one ethnicity's status above others, and keep that status secure.

The issue here is that, in the absence of nationalism for groups like the Jews, Armenians, Poles, and Greeks, we continue to observe the formation of ethnic hierarchies and often undue favoritism to limited interests. The fact of the matter is that people have often fundamentally divergent conventions, values, and experiences and nationalism represents one way of allowing those to find adequate expression and exercise through the nation-state.

All it takes for the state to be merely tolerating the presence of a minority to outright destroying and depriving them is the perception that they're dangerous to the ruling group's status and privilege. This has been the case in every genocide that happened on the basis of ethnic-nationalism. Israel has that structure and potential. Hell, the guy who coined the term "genocide", Zygmunt Bauman, who was a Polish Jew who was involved in WWII, left Israel after a few years living there because of its nationalism.

He may well have left. The issue is that innocent Jewish blood has soaked the streets of the Maghreb and watered the grasses of the Eurasian Steppe since before nationalism was in vogue. At the time of Israel's establishment, those pogroms and massacres were still ongoing. The Europeans and Americans have decided to treat Jews as equals in the past fifty years is not much of an assurance when we look even a bit behind the curtain.

There were Germans who weren't a fan of the Nazis' anti-Semitic policies as well earlier on in their attempts to assert themselves. This is also true in Turkey in the Armenian genocide. That there's detractors doesn't really fill me with any more confidence in Israel, particularly when nothing is actually stopping the IDF from bulldozing homes and the expansion of settlements, as well as the impressment of Israeli rights over other inhabitants of their patrimony and occupied territories.

The issue is that the alternative you proposed isn't realistic.

As I've said before, there is actually a very good argument for there being a Jewish state, but that doesn't make a good argument for the Zionist movement in-particular.

[Fahran]

As I've said before, there is actually a very good argument for there being a Jewish state, but that doesn't make a good argument for the Zionist movement in-particular.

I mean... that's pretty Zionist already. What would you do differently at present?

[Odreria]

As I've said before, there is actually a very good argument for there being a Jewish state, but that doesn't make a good argument for the Zionist movement in-particular.

I mean... that's pretty Zionist already. What would you do differently at present?

Put it in Missouri