[T]he ministers and generals of the two countries, dressed in bathing-drawers and armed with clubs, can have it out among themselves. Whoever survives, his country wins. That would be much simpler and more just than this arrangement, where the wrong people do the fighting.
All Quiet on the Western Front, written by a WW1 veteran
Except for the last guy who will still have one eye. How's the blind guy gonna take the eye of the guy with one eye left? All that guy had to do is run away and hide behind a bush. Gandhi was wrong.
"The war to end war" (also "The war to end all wars";[1] originally from the 1914 book The War That Will End War by H. G. Wells) is a term for the First World War of 1914–1918. Originally an idealistic slogan, it is now mainly used sardonically,[2] since not only was the First World War not history's final war, but its aftermath also indirectly contributed to the outbreak of the even more devastating Second World War.
There will come soft rains and the smell of the ground,
And swallows circling with their shimmering sound;
And frogs in the pools singing at night,
And wild plum trees in tremulous white;
Robins will wear their feathery fire,
Whistling their whims on a low fence-wire;
And not one will know of the war, not one will care at last when it is done.
Not one would mind, neither bird nor tree,
If mankind perished utterly;
And Spring herself, when she woke at dawn
Would scarcely know that we were gone.
I don't disagree, but what entities funds and guide/influence them? They aren't organizations acting on their own, they are puppets.
This does not in any way downplay the travesties that Palestinian people have been through, only to highlight how Iran has used their influence to control one side of the conflict.
They certainly have shared interests, but to consider them 'puppets' ignores their own agencies. Armed resistance against Settler Colonialism will exist regardless of whether they can secure funding from Iran or not. Iran has influence as the main supplier of weapons (most of Hamas' capabilities come from reusing bombs dropped by Israel that failed to detonate), but they do not control the agency of Hamas or Hezbollah. They have their own reasons to fight back.
On the surface - perhaps. But Iran's regime has to keep its image of power for its domestic peace. Israel's gov knows this and they do steps they know would elicit response from Iran in the hopes Iran would actually hit hard and the US would be dragged in official capacity. That would be dramatically destabilizing for the region. I reckon the US threatened Israel with real steps in order to get them to not hit targets that would have led to such escalation.
By dismantling the apartheid, ending the occupation, getting the fuck on their side of their 1967 border, and recognizing the sovereign Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza. Plus, by handing over their war criminals to the ICC and starting a Truth and Reconciliation process. Throw in paying reparations, if they really want peace.
There. Instantly, 90% of Hamas and Hezbollah support has just evaporated. Their neighbours are ready to normalize relations with them. The vast majority of world public opinion is now solidly behind them.
I'd be quite fine with most of this, all of it if by "the occupation" you mean the occupation of Gaza and the West Bank. But, until peace is established there, that isn't going to happen. The majority of Gazans support Hamas and believe they committed no atrocities on October 7th.
if by “the occupation” you mean the occupation of Gaza and the West Bank
Yes, exactly. Including the control of their borders of course.
until peace is established there, that isn’t going to happen
That's entirely the wrong framing. Without these things happening, whatever it is that you think will be established, it won't be "peace", is is only a return to the oppressive status quo ante. It's a cliché but in this conflict, quite literally "no justice, no peace". My laundry list above is not a desirable outcome after some imaginary unjust "peace". It is the precondition for peace. Without dismantling the apartheid, the occupation, etc, you'll only have a temporary lull in the brutality and they go again.
With the number of rockets Hamas and Hezbollah has launched into Israel during "peacetime" while being supplied by Iran, they're doing a great job of staying enemies.
Did you know that the Gazan bomb disposal teams are some of the most skilled in the world? The reason for this is so they can disarm and disassemble unexploded Israeli bombs so that the explosives can be repurposed and fired back. So a surprisingly large portion of the explosives that Hamas used were supplied by Israel via their long-term sporadic bombing of Gaza and anything resembling major infrastructure.
Well maybe Israel should stop its brutal, decades-long apartheid campaign that's pissing off all of its neighbors and pre-dates Hamas by around 50 years.
How many of these brutal wars were started by Israel completely unprovoked, and how many of them were started because Israel's neighbors F-ed around before finding out?
Arguably, all of them involving Israel were started by Israel. Colonists coming in and buying the farm, then refusing to hire the local non-jews who traditionally worked there, is going to provoke a response. They knew this, and it's why they formed militias to attack them and use the response as justification to expand militarily. These militias were formed into the IDF when Israel officially became a nation.
Sure, you can also argue that buying up the land and not hiring the locals was "their right" but you can't really complain when people lose their ability to survive because some foreigners come in and take away their jobs.
Israel has continued this policy of forcing a response from their neighbors and then using this as justification to use much more force to take more territory. Its not happening by accident. It's a strategic move by Israel to provoke their neighbors, yet somehow people like you say the neighbors should have done nothing. Maybe Israel should do nothing. Who's justified?
Good job putting peacetime in quotes, because during that "peacetime" Israel was airstriking Gaza and blockading it. These are straight up acts of war and justify and demand retaliation. Also Hezbollah didn't launch rockets on Israel before October 7th.
Into Lebanese (some consider it Syrian, doesn't change the dynamic) occupied territory before and after Oct 7th. Gradual escalation (with 80% of those attacks coming from Israeli side) expanded the scale of the northern/southern front to what we see today. Israel has killed 2 orders of magnitude more civilians than Hezballah has and has sought escalation at every stage.
Before Oct 7th, they would exchange fire in occupied Lebanese land and tensions would rise then fizzle out about once a month.
Israel should stop occupying territory in violation of dozens of international resolutions and blocking the establishment of a Palestinian state. Belligerent occupiers are in no position to be "provoked" by those who they are occupying. How many wars do the Palestinians get to wage because of the nakba (or countless other massacres) and subsequent colonization of remaining territory?
They should... not subject people to Apartheid and ethnically cleanse them. That'd help.
The initial plan of the militants was to seize a luxury hotel in the Israeli city of Tel Aviv and take tourists and foreign ambassadors hostage to exchange them for Palestinian prisoners in Israeli custody.
Also you say Lebanon but what the fuck do you mean by "Lebanon"? They literally had a civil war at the time. Who exactly are you assigning blame to here and why does that excuse Israel expanding their Apartheid and massacres to another country?
If Israel de-occupies Palestinian and Lebanese land, stops blockading Gaza, stops blowing up chunks of it's neighbors, then it removes any moral grounds for them to continue fighting Israel. Instead we're to believe Israel is the defender when they've occupied their neighbors for 50+ years.
They don't have to go anywhere. They just don't get a religious ethnostate any more. Let Palestine be a free democracy and they are welcome to live in a free society, no apartheid.
I thought the entirety of Israel was unlawfully and immorally seized from the Palestinians over the course of decades. At least, that's what most pro-Palestine folks seem to think.
I thought the entirety of Israel was unlawfully and immorally seized from the Palestinians over the course of decades. At least, that's what most pro-Palestine folks seem to think.
Ethnic Cleansing has always been a cornerstone of Zionism.
Origins of Zionism
Zionism is a settler colonialism project that was able to really start with the support of British Imperialism. Zionism as a political movement started with Theodore Herzl in the 1880s as a 'modern' way to 'solve' the 'Jewish Question' of Europe.
Since at least the 1860's, Europe was increasingly antisemitic and hostile to Jewish people. Zionism was explicitly a Setter Colonialist movement and the native Palestinians were not considered People but Savages by the Europeans. While Zionist Colonization began before it, the Balfor Declaration is when Britain gave it's backing of the movement in order to 'solve' the 'Jewish Question' while also creating a Colony in the newly conquered Middle East after WWI in order to exhibit military force in the region and extract natural resources.
That's when Zionist immigration started to pick up, out of necessity for most as Europe became more hostile and antisemitic. That continued into and during WWII, European countries and even the US refused to expand immigration quotas for Jewish people seeking asylum. The idea that the creation of Israel is a reparation for Jewish people is an after-the-fact justification. While most Jewish immigrants had no choice and just wanted a place to live in peace, it was the Zionist Leadership that developed and implemented the forced transfer, ethnic cleansing, of the native population, Palestinians. Without any Occupation, Apartheid, and ethnic cleansing, there would not be any Palestinian resistance to it.
Herzl himself explicitly considered Zionism a Settler Colonialist project, Setter Colonialism is always violent. The difficulty in creating a democratic Jewish state in an area inhabited by people who are not Jewish, is that enough Palestinian people need to be 'Transferred' to have a demographic majority that is Jewish. Ben-Gurion explicitly rejected Secular Bi-national state solutions in favor of partition.
Quote
Zionism’s aims in Palestine, its deeply-held conviction
that the Land of Israel belonged exclusively to the Jewish people as a whole, and the idea of Palestine’s “civilizational barrenness" or “emptiness” against the background of European imperialist ideologies all converged in the logical conclusion that the native population should make way for thenewcomers.
The idea that the Palestinian Arabs must find a place for themselves elsewhere was articulated early on. Indeed, the founder of the movement, Theodor Herzl, provided an early reference to transfer even before he formally outlined his theory of Zionist rebirth in his Judenstat.
An 1895 entry in his diary provides in embryonic form many of the elements that were to be demonstrated repeatedly in the Zionist quest for solutions to the “Arab problem ”-the idea of dealing with state governments over the heads of the indigenous population, Jewish acquisition of property that would be inalienable, “Hebrew Land" and “Hebrew Labor,” and the removal of the native population.
Israel justifies the settlements and military bases in the West Bank in the name of Security. However, the reality of the settlements on-the-ground has been the cause of violent resistance and a significant obstacle to peace, as it has been for decades.
This type of settlement, where the native population gets 'Transferred' to make room for the settlers, is a long standing practice.
Further, declassified Israeli documents show that the Occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip were deliberately planned before being executed in 1967:
The settlements are maintained through a violent apartheid that routinely employs violence towards Palestinians and denies human rights like water access, civil rights, etc. This kind of control gives rise to violent resistance to the Apartheid occupation, jeopardizing the safety of Israeli civilians.
The apartheid regime is based on organized, systemic violence against Palestinians, which is carried out by numerous agents: the government, the military, the Civil Administration, the Supreme Court, the Israel Police, the Israel Security Agency, the Israel Prison Service, the Israel Nature and Parks Authority, and others. Settlers are another item on this list, and the state incorporates their violence into its own official acts of violence. Settler violence sometimes precedes instances of official violence by Israeli authorities, and at other times is incorporated into them. Like state violence, settler violence is organized, institutionalized, well-equipped and implemented in order to achieve a defined strategic goal.
Visualizing the Ethnic Cleansing Peace Process and Solution
Both Hamas and Fatah have agreed to a Two-State solution based on the 1967 borders for decades. Oslo and Camp David were used by Israel to continue settlements in the West Bank and maintain an Apartheid, while preventing any actual Two-State solution
Otzma Jehudit is part of the Israeli Government coalition, it consists mainly of internationally wanted terrorists. and you want to bat for these terrorists? the ones who have been preaching the 14 words as a justification for genocide?
Assuming that's true, that's one group within the government. Find them, try them, and imprison them. On the other side are three entire genocidal terrorist regimes. Will you side with them? What do you think we should do with them?
we don't need to fucking find them, they are open, they give speeches about how starving and killing every Palestinian is a moral good on a daily basis. they ARE the government, who's going to put them in front of a judge and find them guilty, themselves? you are literally supporting a genocidal terrorist regime.
Calling the people you dislike “terrorists” to avoid critical thinking about the atrocities (including genocide) of your own side isn’t really the gotcha you think it is.
I’m not sure that there is credible evidence of Iran and its affiliates targeting civilians the same way that the occupation has, their acts all seem to be targeting military installations rather than civilian targets. The occupation primarily targets civilians and civilian infrastructure.
I'm not calling them that on my own. I'm describing them the way multiple other nations have described them - not Israel. You only need to see their actions towards their own population to see why.