They weren’t countries. They became countries when the colonizers (and I’m using that term as accurately as possible) lumped together into managed regions and then told them they were countries with their own governments and flags. It was all “We’re going to conquer these people and these people and these people, then put Governor Fitzroy, nephew to the Prince, in charge of all of it with a big army to back him up.” Then they wrote laws and made flags and all the happy crappy stuff they do. Then they lost WWII (because pretty much everyone except for the US lost WWII), and said “you’re on your own.”
They turned former colonies into artificial countries with governments that all but guaranteed factionalism.
There was always war, and there always will be war. But the specific type of war we’re seeing in former colonies is because of the post-colonial situation.
It always works out fine for them. I don't know why anybody says imperialism or colonialism are bad or destructive, seems to me that Britain and France and Spain and Portugal and the Dutch are all doing fine. Really weird how maps of their empires seem to overlap a lot with parts of the world that currently or recently experienced a lot of, idk let's call it "troubles?" They must be dumb or smth
Britain has planted the seeds of hatred and bloodshed in the middle east and is now acting as if it has no responsibility towards resolving the conflict.
It is hard to watch the British media coverage of this war acting all outraged and surprised by the violence while being proud of their historical imperial inheritance .
Britain and France are responsible for such an enormous fuck up in Asia, Africa and the middle east, past and present, it's probably impossible to put it in numbers. The US gets bashed a lot (deservedly), but I think those two were planting something way more devastating for generations to come
The Palestinians are descendants of the ancient canaanites. Most of the people in that region never left they just changed their religion at some point. This hasn't always been happening, in Ottoman times Christians Jews and Muslims peacefully coexisted in the region.
I mean, kinda? They're also heavily descended from 7th Century AD Arabic conquerors, but yes, many other natives may have adopted Arabic culture, language and religion at that time.
But Jewish culture is also derived from the Canaanite culture, with arguably more overlap. Jewish culture in the region can be traced back to at least the 9th Century BC, with the literal Kingdom of Israel. So the argument of "Well who was there first?" does not necessarily favor the Palestinians over the Israelis.
This has always been happening though. It's not like the Ottomans took over the region peacefully. It's been conquered and re-conquered by Babylonians, Egyptians, Greeks, Romans...
Palestinian culture is also derived from canaanite culture. Arabs are semitic people and follow abrahamic traditions. When places get conquered usually the ruling class changes but the lower class people stay in their homes and just change language/religion/identity. Usually the new rulers don't try to completely wipe out the inhabitants of their new land the way israel is doing with Palestinians
Palestine is not a religious entity, and have been in favor of religious coexistence since the very beginning. It is the Zionist state that is exclusive of other religions by design.
When they're celebrating the killing of civilians at a dance party, or the beheading of babies, it is a problem. Religion is the cancer that keeps that entire region either at war, or the brink of war
You're gonna have to substantiate that claim. Show me evidence of Palestinians celebrating "killing of civilians at a dance party, or the beheading of babies". Without evidence, your claim is to be ignored.
Your link shows several quotes from the idf... all of which says "we cannot confirm" not any confirmation of the statement being a lie that i can see. Nor is there any evidence that an official Israeli representative started this story.
They previously presented as fact. Now they're saying they can't confirm it and cannot present any evidence. I don't believe they have to spell out "we lied" for it to be obvious.
Israel is by its own definition the Zionist state founded on religious exclusivism. An ethnocentric state in a land inhabited by other religions and ethnicities. It should absolutely be taken down.
as I already said above, it is because it is an ethnoreligious state that excludes people of other ethnicities (Arabs, Africans, etc) and other religions (Muslims, Christians, etc). It has engaged in massacre and forced expulsion of those people, so it must be taken down and the genocide must cease.
No it is not their business to genocide ethnic and religious minorities lmao. Would you say the same about the Nazis too? was the US justified in genociding native americans also? ridiculous.
Forced expulsion is dtill inside their own country
yes it is. I hope you dont mean that this makes it better. I may be failing to understand this genocide sympathizer logic.
So you take them down with a genocide yourself?
No. The only one committing genocide at the moment and in this conflict is Israel itself.
Also Britain: Oh good, the UN voted in favor of splitting up the land except the entire Arab League voting against the plan? Ok, sounds good, bye guys, have fun!
It's like an HOA: The council is deciding how to divide up your backyard between your neighbors. The lawn owner is the only dissenting vote and then the neighborhood wonders why they are being so hostile.
The Ottoman Empire split after WW1, Israel/Palestine happened in 1948. No one was anticipating Hitler doing genocide in 1919. Britain hadn't considered a plan to award Israel to the persecuted Jewish population of Europe at that point in time.
The Balfour Declaration was in 1917, and Britain began discussing support for the Zionist project in Palestine immediately after declaring war on the Ottoman Empire in 1914. The idea dates back to at least 1896 when Theodore Herzl proposed it as a solution to the "Jewish question" which, itself, was being asked as early as the 1750s.
The meme is wrong though and should say WW1, not WW2. The creation of the State of Israel has nothing to do with the Holocaust, all of it was planned before WW2.
Alternate caption: "Zionists smuggling in settlers before the British mandate ended to have enough votes to create a State of Israel as a safe haven for Holocaust refugees, then getting populated mostly by Jews fleeing Arab countries out of fear of retaliation for having created the State of Israel a day early and having pushed most Palestinians out by force"
Interesting info and I'm not arguing against your point, but that source doesn't address their point at all. The cited source covers recent demographics. The previous user is referring to events that occurred in 1947ish. The time periods are not close enough to be relevant to each other, especially considering the massive changes that occurred throughout that period in the area.
That's kind of like if someone said that the Caribbean was entirely populated by natives when the Europeans showed up in 1492, and someone responded with demographics from the 1570s after the Spanish had established settlements in Cuba, Puerto Rico, Jamaica, Trinidad, and conquered the Aztecs to dismiss the initial point. The demographics are going to be vastly different. It kind of sheds doubt onto your rebuttal since there seems to be a logical disconnect.
Does anyone have any sources on the demographics right before the British invited Jewish people to move to the Levant?
Ashkenazim have European surnames because Europeans literally forced them unto Jews. Austro-Hungary, Russian Empire - both had policies for giving Jews "local" surnames (for taxation purposes). It's how you get Jews with German surnames in eastern and central Europe (i.e.the ones you have listed), and how you get Jews with Ukrainian and Russian-ish surnames in the appropriate areas (see Abramovich, Litvak)
And they did so in Europe. Which means that people with this family names were Jews coming from Europe to Israel and not from Arabic countries like the comment above claimed.
Lol at all of the wannabe thirteen year old edgleords on lemmy who are so confident that they understand this extremely complicated and protracted conflict such that they can reduce it to a single generic cause but can't even be bothered to look up which of the two world wars is the correct one to reference for their edgy meme.
Yeah sure. There is absolutely no pattern of former colonizers creating structures that lead to tensions and violence as they leave. Destabilizing entire regions would never be in the interest of receding former global powers or in the interest of current global powers. They all want all the humans in the world to love each other and live in peace and harmony.
Your point doesn't make any sense because the people doing the attacking are the ones that I'm accusing of choosing violence and hatred. So your comment could be rewritten as:
Are you sure it's not the decision of the people attacking them to choose to attack them?
Yeah that makes sense!
As well, my point was aimed at both sides since both the Israelis and Palestinians are acting out of hatred for each other and this insanity will never end as long as both parties continue to behave this way.
As long as the Palestinians continue to allow Hamas to launch terrorist attacks from Palestinian neighborhoods into Israel, Israel will continue to treat Palestinians as terrorists and bomb their neighborhoods.
Conversely:
As long as Israel continues to treat Palestinians as terrorists and bomb their neighborhoods, Palestinians will continue to allow Hamas to launch terrorist attacks from Palestinian neighborhoods into Israel.
If they're being attacked, then they're not the ones choosing violence and hatred. They are reacting to the violence and hatred being done to them.
As well, my point was aimed at both sides since both the Israelis and Palestinians are acting out of hatred for each other and this insanity will never end as long as both parties continue to behave this way.
Exactly what everyone is pointing out and why you're being downvoted. Your statement was meaningless since both sides would need to choose to stop and that still wouldn't resolve the conflict.
If they're being attacked, then they're not the ones choosing violence and hatred.
No shit Sherlock
They are reacting to the violence and hatred being done to them.
Reacting how? With violence? And hatred? So your rebuttal is:
they're not "choosing" violence and hatred... they're "reacting" with violence and hatred
That's just brilliant!
Exactly what everyone is pointing out...
No I'm pretty certain the vast majority of people are choosing one side over the other and are NOT pointing out that both sides share some responsibility
It's not that complicated, the land in question has been owned by a conquering empire for the better part of two millenia. After WWII and emipres falling out of favor, splitting it up was decided. The locals didn't like the jews getting a country and attacked, they lost. They mobilized for round two, and Israel hit first and won again. Since then Israel started giving back land it seized to the respective countries, in exchange for not attacking again. The region has been at an uneasy truce for 50ish years other than Palestine launching terrorist attacks every few years.
Even animals patrol and defend their territory. Why should human be any different? If anything else, borders are an improvement over constant skirmishes and raids where two different ethnic groups meet.
EDIT: Interesting how you completely ignored the "Borders are a solution to constant ethnic clashes" part of my comment
Freedom good! Borders allow different systems or countries to exist so you have the FREEDOM to choose the one you like the most instead of there being only one option. Borders good!
Interesting how you ignore the reality of constant ethnic clashes and raids inside the borders of many african nations and also across borders e.g. Armenia vs Azerbaijan, Kosovo vs Serbia, Russia vs Ukraine or... Palestine vs Israel.
The animals argument is bad. We are animals and the idea is to refrain of our bad instincts in favour of the greater good most of the time.
That being said abolition of borders is a very bad idea, a very basic visit of human history will squash any misplaced idealism regarding that subject.
That also being said immigration is most of the time a good idea as long as you put a consideratr effort into integration for your newly minted citizens.
Now I realize most of those are opinions without substance, the idea is to realize where people push back and why before backing them up.
The reason ethnic clashes are happening in the first place, is because there was not enough intermingling between neighbors, in big part because people like you thought humans aren't smarter then animals and should be separated.
Humans aren't smarter than animals because we are animals. We're also not smarter than non-human animals either, as evidenced by our self-destructive behavior.
Comeone you are going around all "Hurr durr humans aren't smarter than animals, we are so self-destructive" that's an edgelord position if I've ever seen one
Not for the Jews. Zionism and Islamic anti-Semitism and the violence from these movements predates the British trying to find a solution. However mishandled it was. They are two ideologies fundamentally opposed to one another, and they are incapable of coexistence in their current forms.
Every should know about the Sykes–Picot Agreement, it's one of those treaties/laws that have long lasting consequences in the current world (same with ww2 agreements).
If you just state it's religious, you open up space for "Muslim bad", or "Christian bad" arguments. Which lead to nonsense and prosecution to specific peoples
If you use imperialism concepts, everything fits well together, and it leads to structural criticism of capitalism, and prosecution (to use the same word) against oppressive ideas and power structures, not against specific peoples.
But I can agree that imperialistic forces oppress religions that are not the same as theirs, if that's what you meant.
Yeah, genocide turned out to be much better alternative right?
Either way, the Ottoman empire was on its way out, and the Arabs sought to establish a United state. So whatever the ottomans were doing is irrelevant.
More like: "the Holocaust killed a third of our population, and left us homeless, and the international community and the sovereign nation that controls our ancestral homeland have agreed to give us a tiny piece of desert to rebuild on."
have agreed to give us a tiny piece of desert to rebuild on
Whether or not they were given a tiny piece of desert, it's clear they've taken far more than they were supposed to, and they've continuously done so with the aid of the international community. It's genocide. It's an open air prison. It's apartheid.
It worked so well when they did the same thing for themselves and Ireland.
Also that whole India/Pakistan thing. And I seem to remember some stuff happening in Africa.
The secret ingredient is running the fuck away before either of them notice.
And the Soviets did the same with Armenia and Azerbaijan.
Or Moldova and Transnistria. Or Georgia and Abhazia and South Ossetia
Because all those countries had lovely relationships among the people beforehand with absolutely no genocide and war.
Really easy to make perfect borders that makes everyone happy.
They weren’t countries. They became countries when the colonizers (and I’m using that term as accurately as possible) lumped together into managed regions and then told them they were countries with their own governments and flags. It was all “We’re going to conquer these people and these people and these people, then put Governor Fitzroy, nephew to the Prince, in charge of all of it with a big army to back him up.” Then they wrote laws and made flags and all the happy crappy stuff they do. Then they lost WWII (because pretty much everyone except for the US lost WWII), and said “you’re on your own.”
They turned former colonies into artificial countries with governments that all but guaranteed factionalism.
There was always war, and there always will be war. But the specific type of war we’re seeing in former colonies is because of the post-colonial situation.
Are you suggesting we should reinstate the glory of the British empire?
How the fuck did you get that from what you just read??
It always works out fine for them. I don't know why anybody says imperialism or colonialism are bad or destructive, seems to me that Britain and France and Spain and Portugal and the Dutch are all doing fine. Really weird how maps of their empires seem to overlap a lot with parts of the world that currently or recently experienced a lot of, idk let's call it "troubles?" They must be dumb or smth
Well, since those former colonies can't quite work it out on their own, maybe they should just be brought back into their respective empires again? 🤔
They even had a nice little name for it, The
TroublesFun Times!“Spicy diplomacy”
Well… it shouldn’t be an issue.
Lmfao
Britain has planted the seeds of hatred and bloodshed in the middle east and is now acting as if it has no responsibility towards resolving the conflict.
It is hard to watch the British media coverage of this war acting all outraged and surprised by the violence while being proud of their historical imperial inheritance .
Britain is laughably impotent today.
Britain is still one the Hydra's snake heads in World politics even today
Nice try Boris.
Britain and France are responsible for such an enormous fuck up in Asia, Africa and the middle east, past and present, it's probably impossible to put it in numbers. The US gets bashed a lot (deservedly), but I think those two were planting something way more devastating for generations to come
Don't forget Belgium and the Dutch.
Meanwhile, Portugal: "Hey, as long as you can barter, we're friends!"
One group was actually living there and the other group moved in and literally ripped people from their homes.
That's been happening for the last 5,000 years in that region though, since the Canaanites.
It's not like the Palestinians were the first there.
The Palestinians are descendants of the ancient canaanites. Most of the people in that region never left they just changed their religion at some point. This hasn't always been happening, in Ottoman times Christians Jews and Muslims peacefully coexisted in the region.
I mean, kinda? They're also heavily descended from 7th Century AD Arabic conquerors, but yes, many other natives may have adopted Arabic culture, language and religion at that time.
But Jewish culture is also derived from the Canaanite culture, with arguably more overlap. Jewish culture in the region can be traced back to at least the 9th Century BC, with the literal Kingdom of Israel. So the argument of "Well who was there first?" does not necessarily favor the Palestinians over the Israelis.
This has always been happening though. It's not like the Ottomans took over the region peacefully. It's been conquered and re-conquered by Babylonians, Egyptians, Greeks, Romans...
Palestinian culture is also derived from canaanite culture. Arabs are semitic people and follow abrahamic traditions. When places get conquered usually the ruling class changes but the lower class people stay in their homes and just change language/religion/identity. Usually the new rulers don't try to completely wipe out the inhabitants of their new land the way israel is doing with Palestinians
That's why I love this video, it explains it very well in a graphic manner:
https://youtu.be/8tIdCsMufIY?si=maslr0cZLs-xmTl5
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/8tIdCsMufIY?si=maslr0cZLs-xmTl5
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
6 people deny history.
One group took 2 years to organize an attack on civilians, the other didnt...
The other has been attacking them for decades...
This was on a different level though. Taking civilian hostages? Launching rockets with the target being a music festival?
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights press release outlining large scale targeting of peaceful protesters, women, children, people with disabilities, paramedics and journalists by Israeli snipers: https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2019/02/no-justification-israel-shoot-protesters-live-ammunition
BBC report on the killing of Christian American-Palestinian journalist and subsequent attack of her funeral: https://youtube.com/watch?v=y11CVGz7toM
BBC article about the Human Rights Watch report detailing Israel's crimes of apartheid: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-56898864
The majority of Gaza children suffer from PTSD caused by the constant conditions of warfare, psychological study: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00004/full
Human Rights Watch report on "indiscriminate" bombing of schools by IDF forces: https://www.hrw.org/news/2014/09/11/israel-depth-look-gaza-school-attacks
Al Jazeera article about Israel bombing a refugee camp housing refugees of Israel's air strikes: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/5/14/israels-bombardment-of-gaza-continues-live
Amnesty International—Israeli airstrikes targeting civilian housing constitute war crimes https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/press-release/2021/05/israelopt-pattern-of-israeli-attacks-on-residential-homes-in-gaza-must-be-investigated-as-war-crimes/
Article by the Intercept about Israeli airstrikes targeting medical facilities: https://theintercept.com/2021/05/21/gaza-bombing-hospital-israel/
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/watch?v=y11CVGz7toM
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2019/02/no-justification-israel-shoot-protesters-live-ammunition
IDF snipers intentionally targeting civilians including children
They do it often. Here's a particularly nasty one from 2009, there are plenty more if you care to look.
https://www.hrw.org/report/2009/03/25/rain-fire/israels-unlawful-use-white-phosphorus-gaza
Dont forget Israel bombed Associated Press & Al Jazeera office building in 2021 for reporting against them
Both sides constantly attack civillians.
Someone's parents never taught them to share.
Obligatory fuck religion.
Yeah, fuck religion
Palestine is not a religious entity, and have been in favor of religious coexistence since the very beginning. It is the Zionist state that is exclusive of other religions by design.
All the yelling of "Allahu akbar" while celebrating the death and destruction in Israel, would seem to be in conflict with your statement.
Not all Palestinians are Hamas…
Saying "God is great" is problematic?
They are resisting against the Zionist state founded on genocide and exclusivism. I don't see that violating their will for coexistance.
Obviously
When they're celebrating the killing of civilians at a dance party, or the beheading of babies, it is a problem. Religion is the cancer that keeps that entire region either at war, or the brink of war
You're gonna have to substantiate that claim. Show me evidence of Palestinians celebrating "killing of civilians at a dance party, or the beheading of babies". Without evidence, your claim is to be ignored.
By the way, Israel has already admitted that they faked the "beheading of babies" story. Verify your evidence before responding.
Your link shows several quotes from the idf... all of which says "we cannot confirm" not any confirmation of the statement being a lie that i can see. Nor is there any evidence that an official Israeli representative started this story.
Stop lying about "evidence" before responding.
They previously presented as fact. Now they're saying they can't confirm it and cannot present any evidence. I don't believe they have to spell out "we lied" for it to be obvious.
Biden said he saw the pictures.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/meeting-with-jewish-leaders-biden-confirms-reports-that-hamas-beheaded-israeli-children/
No offense, but that's all the reason not to believe it. "Guys I have proof! I won't show you but trust me bro, I've seen it!"
White House has already confirmed they have not seen the photos
https://www.palestinechronicle.com/no-proof-of-beheaded-israeli-babies-white-house-backtracks-on-bidens-comments-breaking/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/10/11/israel-hamas-war-updates-gaza-attack/#link-SIA4LEH6CVAGFEXIJ4556IMXRI
Forgot a "while murdering and beheading innocent civilians" there
So then, why is their official goal to destroy Israel? Thats 100% a religious war
Israel is by its own definition the Zionist state founded on religious exclusivism. An ethnocentric state in a land inhabited by other religions and ethnicities. It should absolutely be taken down.
Israel is not Judaism.
What exactly justifies the takedown of Israel? That its religion is different or what? Thats none of ghe other countries business.
as I already said above, it is because it is an ethnoreligious state that excludes people of other ethnicities (Arabs, Africans, etc) and other religions (Muslims, Christians, etc). It has engaged in massacre and forced expulsion of those people, so it must be taken down and the genocide must cease.
So what? Thats their business what rules they want to have inside their country. Thats nl reason to attack them.
Forced expulsion is dtill inside their own country. So you take them down with a genocide yourself? Fight fire with fire?
Come on...
No it is not their business to genocide ethnic and religious minorities lmao. Would you say the same about the Nazis too? was the US justified in genociding native americans also? ridiculous.
yes it is. I hope you dont mean that this makes it better. I may be failing to understand this genocide sympathizer logic.
No. The only one committing genocide at the moment and in this conflict is Israel itself.
Also Britain: Oh good, the UN voted in favor of splitting up the land except the entire Arab League voting against the plan? Ok, sounds good, bye guys, have fun!
It's like an HOA: The council is deciding how to divide up your backyard between your neighbors. The lawn owner is the only dissenting vote and then the neighborhood wonders why they are being so hostile.
Except in this case it costs you not just your backyard but basically your entire life.
In this case the land owner has been renting for 100 years and doesn't really care what the tenant thinks.
Also Britain: our troops and colonial administrators are getting killed and attacked by both groups of locals, bye guys, I'm noping out of here!
I do hope the Israel and Palestine Wikipedia pages are doing ok.
Looks like there's a war
FINE YOU WEIRDO ZEALOTS:
I do hope the Palestine and Israel Wikipedia pages are doing ok.
wut
He posted the same message but swapped the order so that both sides would be happy-ish.
LOL
It's working as intended, the whole Ottoman Empire was split to create manufactured internal conflict.
The Ottoman Empire split after WW1, Israel/Palestine happened in 1948. No one was anticipating Hitler doing genocide in 1919. Britain hadn't considered a plan to award Israel to the persecuted Jewish population of Europe at that point in time.
The Balfour Declaration was in 1917, and Britain began discussing support for the Zionist project in Palestine immediately after declaring war on the Ottoman Empire in 1914. The idea dates back to at least 1896 when Theodore Herzl proposed it as a solution to the "Jewish question" which, itself, was being asked as early as the 1750s.
I cant believe it, someone who actually knows what they are speaking about?? in my imitation Reddit forum????
Let's not forget that Britain also ensured the rights of Palestinians in that same declaration, I would like to see them act on that one.
The meme is wrong though and should say WW1, not WW2. The creation of the State of Israel has nothing to do with the Holocaust, all of it was planned before WW2.
Alternate caption: "Zionists smuggling in settlers before the British mandate ended to have enough votes to create a State of Israel as a safe haven for Holocaust refugees, then getting populated mostly by Jews fleeing Arab countries out of fear of retaliation for having created the State of Israel a day early and having pushed most Palestinians out by force"
You realize that most Israelis came from Europe after WW2?
or do you think Liebermann, Herzog, Weitzmann, Goldberg, Weinstein etc. are Arabic names?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israelis 33 % are ethnic Europeans as opposed to 12% from asia and 15% from Africa
Interesting info and I'm not arguing against your point, but that source doesn't address their point at all. The cited source covers recent demographics. The previous user is referring to events that occurred in 1947ish. The time periods are not close enough to be relevant to each other, especially considering the massive changes that occurred throughout that period in the area.
That's kind of like if someone said that the Caribbean was entirely populated by natives when the Europeans showed up in 1492, and someone responded with demographics from the 1570s after the Spanish had established settlements in Cuba, Puerto Rico, Jamaica, Trinidad, and conquered the Aztecs to dismiss the initial point. The demographics are going to be vastly different. It kind of sheds doubt onto your rebuttal since there seems to be a logical disconnect.
Does anyone have any sources on the demographics right before the British invited Jewish people to move to the Levant?
Edit: which mysteriously doesn't appear to link on my end.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Palestine_(region)
Ashkenazim have European surnames because Europeans literally forced them unto Jews. Austro-Hungary, Russian Empire - both had policies for giving Jews "local" surnames (for taxation purposes). It's how you get Jews with German surnames in eastern and central Europe (i.e.the ones you have listed), and how you get Jews with Ukrainian and Russian-ish surnames in the appropriate areas (see Abramovich, Litvak)
And they did so in Europe. Which means that people with this family names were Jews coming from Europe to Israel and not from Arabic countries like the comment above claimed.
Wan't that WW1?
It was. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration
I guess technically ww1 wasn't even over.
Lol at all of the wannabe thirteen year old edgleords on lemmy who are so confident that they understand this extremely complicated and protracted conflict such that they can reduce it to a single generic cause but can't even be bothered to look up which of the two world wars is the correct one to reference for their edgy meme.
Yeah sure. There is absolutely no pattern of former colonizers creating structures that lead to tensions and violence as they leave. Destabilizing entire regions would never be in the interest of receding former global powers or in the interest of current global powers. They all want all the humans in the world to love each other and live in peace and harmony.
It's still the decision of the people living in those lands whether to choose hatred and violence as a way to solve their problems.
Are you sure it's not the decision of the people attacking them?
Note that I'm being intentionally vague to point out how silly your statement is.
Your point doesn't make any sense because the people doing the attacking are the ones that I'm accusing of choosing violence and hatred. So your comment could be rewritten as:
Yeah that makes sense!
As well, my point was aimed at both sides since both the Israelis and Palestinians are acting out of hatred for each other and this insanity will never end as long as both parties continue to behave this way.
As long as the Palestinians continue to allow Hamas to launch terrorist attacks from Palestinian neighborhoods into Israel, Israel will continue to treat Palestinians as terrorists and bomb their neighborhoods.
Conversely:
As long as Israel continues to treat Palestinians as terrorists and bomb their neighborhoods, Palestinians will continue to allow Hamas to launch terrorist attacks from Palestinian neighborhoods into Israel.
See the problem? This will never end.
If they're being attacked, then they're not the ones choosing violence and hatred. They are reacting to the violence and hatred being done to them.
Exactly what everyone is pointing out and why you're being downvoted. Your statement was meaningless since both sides would need to choose to stop and that still wouldn't resolve the conflict.
No shit Sherlock
Reacting how? With violence? And hatred? So your rebuttal is:
That's just brilliant!
No I'm pretty certain the vast majority of people are choosing one side over the other and are NOT pointing out that both sides share some responsibility
Lol you're as dumb as you are a jerk
It's not that complicated, the land in question has been owned by a conquering empire for the better part of two millenia. After WWII and emipres falling out of favor, splitting it up was decided. The locals didn't like the jews getting a country and attacked, they lost. They mobilized for round two, and Israel hit first and won again. Since then Israel started giving back land it seized to the respective countries, in exchange for not attacking again. The region has been at an uneasy truce for 50ish years other than Palestine launching terrorist attacks every few years.
Borders are violence.
Borders areviolence.Religion is violence
Why not both?
good argument. Agreed
laughs in Australian
laughs in emu
Even animals patrol and defend their territory. Why should human be any different? If anything else, borders are an improvement over constant skirmishes and raids where two different ethnic groups meet.
EDIT: Interesting how you completely ignored the "Borders are a solution to constant ethnic clashes" part of my comment
Animals kill and eat their young. They roll or eat shit. They rape. You sure that's the argument you want to use here?
That's bad. But why are borders bad?
Freedom good! Borders allow different systems or countries to exist so you have the FREEDOM to choose the one you like the most instead of there being only one option. Borders good!
These comments read like a realism vs idealism debate
Interesting how you ignore the reality of constant ethnic clashes and raids inside the borders of many african nations and also across borders e.g. Armenia vs Azerbaijan, Kosovo vs Serbia, Russia vs Ukraine or... Palestine vs Israel.
"animals do it why shouldn't we" is one of the worst reasons to do something. Animals are literally dumber than us.
You are an animal...
The animals argument is bad. We are animals and the idea is to refrain of our bad instincts in favour of the greater good most of the time.
That being said abolition of borders is a very bad idea, a very basic visit of human history will squash any misplaced idealism regarding that subject.
That also being said immigration is most of the time a good idea as long as you put a consideratr effort into integration for your newly minted citizens.
Now I realize most of those are opinions without substance, the idea is to realize where people push back and why before backing them up.
What makes you think we should act just like wild animals?
The reason ethnic clashes are happening in the first place, is because there was not enough intermingling between neighbors, in big part because people like you thought humans aren't smarter then animals and should be separated.
Humans aren't smarter than animals because we are animals. We're also not smarter than non-human animals either, as evidenced by our self-destructive behavior.
Easy now dont cut yourself on the edge you've got there bucko
Are you a bot, or just really dumb? That phrase doesn't even apply...
Comeone you are going around all "Hurr durr humans aren't smarter than animals, we are so self-destructive" that's an edgelord position if I've ever seen one
Got it, it was the second option.
The animals argument is fucking stupid.
How exactly are borders helping? In what was specifically?
This war really makes you hate Britain (and possibly France) for causing unrest in the first place
Yeah it was a land of peace with no unrest until the British came.
Compared to now it was a utopia.
Not for the Jews. Zionism and Islamic anti-Semitism and the violence from these movements predates the British trying to find a solution. However mishandled it was. They are two ideologies fundamentally opposed to one another, and they are incapable of coexistence in their current forms.
Remember to save a little hate for the US
Every should know about the Sykes–Picot Agreement, it's one of those treaties/laws that have long lasting consequences in the current world (same with ww2 agreements).
Palestinians also contain Christians. Its just the modern term for gentiles in Israel now.
It's not a religious conflict. It's an imperialistic conflict.
It's both. Religion is a cancer.
The fact that you think there's a difference is sad.
If you just state it's religious, you open up space for "Muslim bad", or "Christian bad" arguments. Which lead to nonsense and prosecution to specific peoples
If you use imperialism concepts, everything fits well together, and it leads to structural criticism of capitalism, and prosecution (to use the same word) against oppressive ideas and power structures, not against specific peoples.
But I can agree that imperialistic forces oppress religions that are not the same as theirs, if that's what you meant.
Because all things point to "capitalism bad" for the lemmy FOSS nerd social studies undergrad.
Are social studies undergrads often fans of FOSS lol?
"promising to give two different groups"? You mean the natives and the colonisers? Tf is this "meme"?
France and England seeing their current new citizens and wondering if it was worth it to fight.
It was still a better plan than the ottoman empire had before Britain took it from them.
Yeah, genocide turned out to be much better alternative right?
Either way, the Ottoman empire was on its way out, and the Arabs sought to establish a United state. So whatever the ottomans were doing is irrelevant.
What was that?
Sort of.
The Arabs had plenty of opportunities to form their own state(s) in the region over time, but at every juncture they rejected the opportunity.
"You're not using your land the way we like, so we're gonna take it!"
More like: "the Holocaust killed a third of our population, and left us homeless, and the international community and the sovereign nation that controls our ancestral homeland have agreed to give us a tiny piece of desert to rebuild on."
Whether or not they were given a tiny piece of desert, it's clear they've taken far more than they were supposed to, and they've continuously done so with the aid of the international community. It's genocide. It's an open air prison. It's apartheid.
Hmm.. I WONDER what happened to make those borders change? If only there was some way to find information on the Internet!
Yes this diagram needs some extra labels about who started the war in each expansion.
You mean like a minority population unilaterally declaring they are their own country and the land belongs to them now.
Even the forced spread of the eurocentric notion of a nation state is a product of imperialism.
Lol