The replacement of Israel with a Muslim Palestinian state would mean the abolition of the Jewish state.
Its so fucked that this is the dichotomy presented. Like “oh you want the Apartheid oppressing Muslims to end? That means you want Apartheid where the Muslims are the oppressors!”.
The fact that people mean “No Apartheid” when they talk about freedom is just glossed over. As well as the Christians (both arab and settler) suffering under the laws codifying Jewish supremacy in Israel. Opposing Israel does not mean opposing Jews in general and wanting freedom for everyone in Palestine does not mean wanting freedom only for the Arab population much less only the Muslim Arab population.
The fact that people mean “No Apartheid” when they talk about freedom is just glossed over.
Maybe that is because this is completely delusional. Palestine has repeatedly refused any deal that would lead to freedom and piece in a world where Israel still exists. Hamas is extremely open about their goal to eradicate Israel in its entirety. Unfortunately, the reality of this conflict is that there is not enough support for a peaceful solution among the Arabic population in the middle east, least of all among Palestinians.
Could you please explain what exactly the deals were that were rejected by the Palestinians?
And which “the Palestinians” rejected these deals? Which Palestinian organization could accept or reject deals? After all, Israel and its allies have never negotiated with Hamas. “You don’t negotiate with terrorists!” right?
Even if it was you who supported and promoted this terrorist organization in order to deprive the competing organization of the legitimacy to speak for all of Palestine.
And finally, I would be happy if you could say a little more about why “the Palestinians” found these deals unacceptable.
Or did they really justify it by saying that destroying Israel wasn’t part of the deal?
You know, I recently discovered the statements of “Breaking the silence”. They taught me how to extract a never-ending stream of terrorists from a population.
Your view on Arab people is very racist. And your arguments don’t hold up considering that Israel and the west repeatedly torpedoed every democratic peoples movement, to the point where in the time leading up to the Al-Aqsa flood they only allowed cash transfers to Hamas pass the checkpoints. Freedom for Palestine is a call to end Apartheid and for a secular state.
The Arabs immediately attacked Israel when the British mandate ended, and Palestine was ruled by the PLO for nearly 30 years, which had a mandate to end Jewish existence in the area. And for the last 17 years they’ve been ruled by Hamas, who also wanted to eradicate the Jews.
So history has shown that Palestinians are not exactly fond of their “secular” state having Jews in it.
Unfortunately, the reality of this conflict is that there is not enough support for a peaceful solution among the Arabic population in the middle east, least of all among Palestinians.
Odd statement considering there was (according to the latest Last Week Tonight episode) a survey shortly before the attacks that had about 3/4 of the population supporting a peaceful solution among Palestinians.
Its so fucked that this is the dichotomy presented. Like “oh you want the Apartheid oppressing Muslims to end? That means you want Apartheid where the Muslims are the oppressors!”.
The fact that people mean “No Apartheid” when they talk about freedom is just glossed over. As well as the Christians (both arab and settler) suffering under the laws codifying Jewish supremacy in Israel. Opposing Israel does not mean opposing Jews in general and wanting freedom for everyone in Palestine does not mean wanting freedom only for the Arab population much less only the Muslim Arab population.
Maybe that is because this is completely delusional. Palestine has repeatedly refused any deal that would lead to freedom and piece in a world where Israel still exists. Hamas is extremely open about their goal to eradicate Israel in its entirety. Unfortunately, the reality of this conflict is that there is not enough support for a peaceful solution among the Arabic population in the middle east, least of all among Palestinians.
Could you please explain what exactly the deals were that were rejected by the Palestinians?
And which “the Palestinians” rejected these deals? Which Palestinian organization could accept or reject deals? After all, Israel and its allies have never negotiated with Hamas. “You don’t negotiate with terrorists!” right?
Even if it was you who supported and promoted this terrorist organization in order to deprive the competing organization of the legitimacy to speak for all of Palestine.
And finally, I would be happy if you could say a little more about why “the Palestinians” found these deals unacceptable.
Or did they really justify it by saying that destroying Israel wasn’t part of the deal?
You know, I recently discovered the statements of “Breaking the silence”. They taught me how to extract a never-ending stream of terrorists from a population.
Your view on Arab people is very racist. And your arguments don’t hold up considering that Israel and the west repeatedly torpedoed every democratic peoples movement, to the point where in the time leading up to the Al-Aqsa flood they only allowed cash transfers to Hamas pass the checkpoints. Freedom for Palestine is a call to end Apartheid and for a secular state.
The Arabs immediately attacked Israel when the British mandate ended, and Palestine was ruled by the PLO for nearly 30 years, which had a mandate to end Jewish existence in the area. And for the last 17 years they’ve been ruled by Hamas, who also wanted to eradicate the Jews.
So history has shown that Palestinians are not exactly fond of their “secular” state having Jews in it.
Odd statement considering there was (according to the latest Last Week Tonight episode) a survey shortly before the attacks that had about 3/4 of the population supporting a peaceful solution among Palestinians.
A peaceful solution where they control the entire region.