Comment on So is Israel just going to finish Palestine off?

• Varyk@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  You claimed:

  “I literally don’t care”.

  Sure doesn’t seem to jive with your histrionics.

  Also, the history of Israel and Palestine is incredibly well documented. Going back 75 years.

  You could literally search on any engine and find it instantly. You don’t even need a particular source to figure out how old this conflict is.

  Which is probably where you should start.

  source

  • SleezyDizasta@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    If you actually took into account the context, it’s very obvious that I said I don’t care about your claim that conflict is old and goes back many years. Nobody is disputing that. My point is that you made specific claim, which is that Israel wants to annex the Palestinian territories entirely as their ultimate goal, however, that is blatantly false because Israel literally gave up their settlements in Gaza voluntarily in 2005 and unilaterally existed. If their ultimate goal is complete conquest, why would they have done such a move? This event contradicts your thesis and disproves your claim.

    source

    • Varyk@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

      A lot of unnecessary fluff, but you do have a question hidden down there.

      Let’s answer your question.

      Paraphrased: “After decades of colonization, why would Israel publicly state that they were ending all illegal ongoing colonization?”

      Because they already took most of the land(see picture) and didn’t have to give any back.

      Because there was a lot of complaints about them colonizing Palestine, especially as the internet became more popular and people became more aware of the illegal Israeli colonization of Palestinian land.

      By publicly stating that Israel would no longer annex Palestinian land, they didn’t have to give up any of the land they already colonized over the past half century, civilians could continue to colonize Palestinian land because it wasn’t official government or military colonization, and people would be mollified.

      And it worked.

      You apparently aren’t even aware they were still colonizing Palestine because they put out a press release that said “no backsies, but some of us will stop officially colonizing this country after 60 years”.

      The civilians are still settling Palestinian land(they never stopped) that has been now evacuated because, you know, they’re killing all the Palestinians.

      aljazeera.com/…/israeli-settlement-expansion-in-p…

      aljazeera.com/…/how-israeli-settlers-are-expandin…

      Image

      source

      • SleezyDizasta@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

        A lot of unnecessary fluff, but you do have a question hidden down there.

        What fluff? I wrote 5 sentences lmao

        Paraphrased: “After decades of colonization, why would Israel publicly state that they were ending all illegal ongoing colonization?”

        Yeah, this isn’t going to fly by me. This is just the strawman fallacy. That is NOT what I asked. I asked a very simple and straight forward question:

        If their ultimate goal is complete conquest, why would they have done such a move?

        This is clearly in reference to their unilateral exit in 2005 from Gaza. If you want to have a discussion with me then at least have the decency to be honest. I won’t respond to an answer about a question I didn’t ask, but I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt to answer the actual question I asked. If you can’t help but be disingenuous then I’m afraid this discussion will end with my comment here.

        aljazeera.com/…/israeli-settlement-expansion-in-p… aljazeera.com/…/how-israeli-settlers-are-expandin…

        Al Jazeera is literally a state sponsored propaganda outlet that is owned by the authoritarian theocracy of Qatar. This outlet is a bad source in general, but it’s notorious for it’s misinformation and outright when it comes to this specific conflict. If this is where you get your information then I’m not surprised why your talking points are nothing than inaccurate propaganda.

        Image

        This image is a prime example of what propaganda looks like. I know you don’t have any, but let’s use our critical thinking skills for a bit and analyze why this picture is complete trash:

        1. The key insinuates that Jews are foreign to the area. This is also entirely false. Jews have always had very sizable presence in this region dating back thousands of years. They were there long before islam, long before Arab colonization, long before the Roman even came up with the term Palestine. This is because Jews are indigenous to the area, but the word choices for the key is trying to erase that.
        2. The colors chosen are also propaganda. They chose green for Palestine, which is the national color, but instead of using blue for Israel, they chose white. Why is that? Well that’s easy, because this color scheme gives the impression that Palestine is “real” entity and it is being “erased”, when that’s not the case.
        3. The first map is intentionally there to insinuate that Palestine existed prior to 1947. This is entirely false. Before the creation of the modern states, before that there was the British mandate, and before that it was the Ottoman Empire which had completely different division for this region. Palestine as sovereign entity has quite literally never existed at any point in history. The concept of a Palestinian nation is as artificial and new as the modern state of Israel.
        4. Also the the first map is also dishonest in another way because it colors inhabited areas as green. The Negev desert for example is largely uninhabited but it is colored green to give the impression that Palestine is more than what it actually is. Most muslim Arabs back then lived in the same sliver of land as what it showed for the Jews, but if they just showed an honest map of the Arab and Jewish settlements then it would give a different story and this wouldn’t be such a good propaganda map, now would it?
        5. The second map tries insinuate that the UN took away from Palestine in 1947, but that’s false because that was the very first time Palestine was even acknowledged as a sovereign entity.
        6. The third map exists to try and give a sense of progression while also masking away massive amounts of context… like the wars of 1948 and 1967 when Palestine rejected any plans for peace and coexistence, and they along with their Arab allies formed coalition armies and invaded Israel from every angle with the explicit intention of destroying… but they ended up losing both wars in a pretty convincing fashion against Israel by itself. As a part of the peace agreements the Arabs agreed to cede land to Israel.
        7. The first 3 maps go from 1947 to 1967, but then on the fourth map, it skips 38 years and stops at 2005… 19 years ago. Why would it skip all of this time? And why stop at this point in 2005? Well it’s simple, if they stopped any earlier then their propaganda map would be called out for not recognizing that Israel left Gaza as that’s a the biggest sign that Israel is trying to cooperate to find peace, but if they stopped the map more recently then their propaganda map would’ve been called out for not pointing out any of the atrocities that the Palestinians instigated and committed. This point in 2005 is just perfect for propaganda, it’s far back enough in time to feel disconnected from the modern Palestinian terrorist attacks and wars, but recent enough where it could be argued into the present.
        8. Finally, the map has no source. It’s a perfect propaganda piece because it can’t be traced back to where it originated and therefore isn’t a source to verify the accuracy of the information.

        Now what did we learn from all of this little exercise? A little of critical thinking can go a long way in recognizing and dispelling propaganda. Try it some time!

        source

        • -> View More Comments