Israel-Hamas War 2023

[Razgovory]

I don't support the colonization of the West Bank.

You just turn a blind eye to it and approve everything Israel does.  But you don't support it.  Strange take to have.

Please, no more false statements.

[Razgovory]

Yeah, you are not getting it.  Air Strip One was a fictional future country.  If we establish airstrip one in 50 years now, you can't say that Air Strip One has always existed.  Yet you do that with Palestine.

This makes your argument even worse.
Leaving aside the fiction vs. reality angle (I had to look up that Father Ted bit though....). Airstrip One is a (warning we don't want of a) future nation. That it has no past and is artificially created by an illegitimate regime as a means of stomping down a people's freedom is its entire point.

Palestine is a very real place in the present with a long history. If the desires of the zionists come true it won't have a future. It is what is being actively eliminated.

One could argue they're literally opposite ends of the equation.

As it happens Israel is older than Palestine, It is first mentioned in Egyptian sources in 1209-1203 BC.  Palestine comes from Pelest a people (probably from Europe, maybe Greece), who invaded the region around 1150 BC.  The Egyptians let them settle in the area that is the Gaza strip.  These colonists did fight the Israelites but were eventually crushed by the Persians.  After the Jewish revolts in Judea the Romans genocided and ethnically cleansed the Jews and renamed the province  "Syria Palestine".  Eventually The Arabs then the Turks took over and it was just Syria.  When the British took it over they renamed it Palestine.

Palestine is and has always been the colonial name of the area.

As I've already said this is a shit argument for problems in the current day.
Its basically akin to saying if some group comes along and conquers a chunk of France but calls themselves "Gaul" then they're instantly far more legitimate than any groups calling themselves France.

Yet despite choosing this invalid point, it doesn't even back you up. So purely academically...

The earliest sources for Palestine and Israel come from around the same point in time. However Israel quite solidly refers to a kingdom in the north of the current country. Gaza and its surroundings were Palestine.

I've seen far right folk throwing that "Palestinians are Philistines from Greece!" one out weirdly often. As if it means anything. We're talking about the second millenium BC here.
1500 years before the English showed up in England.
Back when southern Korea was probably still Japonic.
More than long enough ago to be counted as native as can be- besides which these are the ancestors of Palestinians and Israelis both....
Every name is a "colonial" name. History was pretty messy, pre-history even more-so.

The Romans killed a shit-tonne of Jews. But they didn't wipe them out. A lot of them stayed behind and with time many of their descendants became Christian and then the bulk of those Muslim (and various other groups).

Palestine remained Palestine under the Arabs and Turks. Britain didn't rename it. Weird and easily disproven myth that still gets echoed.
But if your argument is that a gap in the use of a name somehow delegitimises all associated with it (again- daft. Why do you think this is a remotely relevant argument for human rights in the 21st century?) ....you might want to think about Israel and how long that went unused.

You are soooo close to getting it.  Palestine wasn't a real place at time the British conquered it.  They made a forgotten realm into a new one.  The people there didn't know they were Palestinian until the British told them they were.  The identity of Palestinian comes from that, not ancient history.  If the British had called their territory "Israel" would that made any difference?


Earliest reference to Israel is the Mernaptah stele 1213 -1203.  The pharaoh brags about destroying them in Caanan. (this is long before the establishment of a Northern kingdom of Israel.)  Earliest reference to Palestinian is the Mortuary Temple of Ramseses the 2nd. They are invaders who later settle in Palestine.  You said Palestine goes first, that Israel is founded in Palestine.  Your statement is false.  I was correcting you.  This isn't far right, it is archeology.  

The Palestinians do not claim decent from Jews.  While it would be logical to claim they do, they do not.  Because they are racists and Jews are the sons of apes and pigs.  For them to be descended from Jews would mean they are also descended from apes and pigs.  Remember the Arabs were developing their own nationalist identity in the early twentieth century.  When they looked for role models they looked toward Germany...

Just out of curiosity, how long does a people have to live in a land before they start to be "native".  How long after they leave it do they lose that status?

I think it genocide and ethnic cleansing is a fair way to describe what happened to the jews in Roman Judea you know, with the whole exile thing.  I can make it simpler for you, if you liike.  In more modern terms:

White People:  Nope you can't live in Israel anymore.  You need to leave
Jews:  Okay, we'll move to Europe
White People:  NO!  You don't understand, we REALLY don't want you here either
Jews: Okay, we'll just go back to Israel
White People:  Nope, turns out we don't want you there either.  You got to go somewhere else.

[Tamas]

A member of the Israeli security forces stands guard inside a cordoned-off area in Kiryat Bialik in the Haifa district of Israel after a reported strike by Lebanon's Hezbollah. Photograph: Jack Guez/AFP/Getty Images

Could we have an international outrage please for not considering the danger to children when executing this attack?

[Valmy]

White People:  Nope you can't live in Israel anymore.  You need to leave
Jews:  Okay, we'll move to Europe
White People:  NO!  You don't understand, we REALLY don't want you here either
Jews: Okay, we'll just go back to Israel
White People:  Nope, turns out we don't want you there either.  You got to go somewhere else.

Yeah well a large number of Israelis will die before living anywhere else. Too late for that.

[Razgovory]

White People:  Nope you can't live in Israel anymore.  You need to leave
Jews:  Okay, we'll move to Europe
White People:  NO!  You don't understand, we REALLY don't want you here either
Jews: Okay, we'll just go back to Israel
White People:  Nope, turns out we don't want you there either.  You got to go somewhere else.

Yeah well a large number of Israelis will die before living anywhere else. Too late for that.

Imagine that.  "put your weapons down and disperse, we won't hurt you this time!"

[Razgovory]

A member of the Israeli security forces stands guard inside a cordoned-off area in Kiryat Bialik in the Haifa district of Israel after a reported strike by Lebanon's Hezbollah. Photograph: Jack Guez/AFP/Getty Images

Could we have an international outrage please for not considering the danger to children when executing this attack?

Only if we condemn Israel in the same breath.

[Josquius]

It was quite the contrast on the news last night.
Showing this area destroyed by Hezbollah, mentioning they claimed to be targeting military areas but had clearly hit a civilian area....then showing the result of Israel's strike in Lebanon, where they've made a significantly larger crater in the middle of a town.

You are soooo close to getting it.

You on the other hand keep getting further and further away.

Palestine wasn't a real place at time the British conquered it.  They made a forgotten realm into a new one.  The people there didn't know they were Palestinian until the British told them they were.  The identity of Palestinian comes from that, not ancient history.  If the British had called their territory "Israel" would that made any difference?

Stop repeating far right nonsense.
There is a constant chain of historic sources mentioning Palestine dating back into ancient history.
Does Virginia being part of the USA mean Virginia is a place that doesn't exist?

If the British had called the territory Israel there'd probably be no Israel today as it would have really enraged the Palestinians ahead of time and showed them what the plan was up front.

Earliest reference to Israel is the Mernaptah stele 1213 -1203.  The pharaoh brags about destroying them in Caanan. (this is long before the establishment of a Northern kingdom of Israel.)  Earliest reference to Palestinian is the Mortuary Temple of Ramseses the 2nd. They are invaders who later settle in Palestine.  You said Palestine goes first, that Israel is founded in Palestine.  Your statement is false.  I was correcting you.  This isn't far right, it is archeology. 

Its basic archaeology indeed. Yet you seem incapable of understanding it.
This early Israel mention FYI was referring to a people known as the Israelites, not land.
A quick check and I see the first origins for 'Palestine' (again talking about a people at first) in 1150BC. Which when you're talking about such ancient history where the record is so incomplete, is basically the same time.
Israel as a country was formed in the north of the modern country whilst 'Palestine'/Philistia was around Gaza.
This is something that Israel drum bangers usually have no trouble accepting. Its biblical and archaeological.

The Palestinians do not claim decent from Jews.  While it would be logical to claim they do, they do not.  Because they are racists and Jews are the sons of apes and pigs.

I see.
So when the Japanese claimed their emperor was descended from the sun god that was totally true because its what they claimed?
Official genealogies of the British royals still have Odin in there too. Must be true if they claim it.

I prefer science rather than what people believe. And the science shows the Palestinians and Israelis of local descent are very closely related indeed.

Just out of curiosity, how long does a people have to live in a land before they start to be "native".  How long after they leave it do they lose that status?

Reality doesn't work on such absolute rules.
But if 3000 years doesn't meet your standards... then that's just mad.
Not to mention again, lets highlight and underline this, the Palestinians aren't just Philistines. Thats not how genetics works. The greater part of their makeup is local to the area stretching way back into pre-history.

I think it genocide and ethnic cleansing is a fair way to describe what happened to the jews in Roman Judea you know, with the whole exile thing.  I can make it simpler for you, if you liike.  In more modern terms:

White People:  Nope you can't live in Israel anymore.  You need to leave
Jews:  Okay, we'll move to Europe
White People:  NO!  You don't understand, we REALLY don't want you here either
Jews: Okay, we'll just go back to Israel
White People:  Nope, turns out we don't want you there either.  You got to go somewhere else.

Again I prefer to look at actual history rather than folk belief.
The Romans absolutely did not completely cleanse the area. Many were killed, many left, but many remained behind.

Interesting you choose to deny this particular fact about a continuous Jewish presence in Palestine when its one that zionists usually tend to push- neglecting the bit about most of them converting away from Judaism of course.

[OttoVonBismarck]

Showing this area destroyed by Hezbollah, mentioning they claimed to be targeting military areas but had clearly hit a civilian area....then showing the result of Israel's strike in Lebanon, where they've made a significantly larger crater in the middle of a town.

This is a good example of why people that don't know anything maybe shouldn't talk. The size of a crater doesn't indicate whether the target was civilian or not or how much care was taken. There are plenty of places in Lebanon that are just going to be large Hezbollah weapons depots.

[crazy canuck]

The statement could have been made accurately in 1900.  "Palestine" was a term up to that point mainly used by Europeans with a classical education.  For almost all the Ottoman period, those lands were part of the Damascus province; they were "Syrian". Very late, the lands around Jerusalem were spun off into a separate province directly run from Istanbul, most likely for security reasons. 

It's well known there was Jewish migration into the region in the late 19th century and increasing in the first half of the 20th.  What is less known is that there were also significant levels of Arab migration from other areas during the mandatory period. So just as many Israelis descend from immigrants from elsewhere the same is true for some Palestinians as well.

What cemented Palestinian identity as Palestinian were two things: (1) Zionism, and (2) the utter failure of other Arab and Muslim powers to defeat Zionism.  It's origin is as a reactive nationalism, but that is not an unusual origin, nor does it make it any less legitimate.

Zionism and Palestinian nationalisms are both nationalisms and their validity stands on equal terms with each other *as well as other nationalisms* Arguments to the contrary, whether made by pro-Zionists seeking to devalue Palestinian self-determination or by either Western leftists or antisemites seeking to devalue Zionism, all proceed from the same error that certain nationalisms are "natural" or "organic" and thereby superior to others.  There is no such thing as a "natural" nationalism, and nationalisms do not exist in nature.  They are all artifices.

One point of disagreement.  Palestinian nationalism would have occurred without Zionism simply as a consequence of the territory of Palestine being created after the fall of the Ottoman Empire. 

It would have looked very similar to the other Arab nationalist movements within the other newly created territories.

[Valmy]

Again I prefer to look at actual history rather than folk belief.
The Romans absolutely did not completely cleanse the area. Many were killed, many left, but many remained behind.

Interesting you choose to deny this particular fact about a continuous Jewish presence in Palestine when its one that zionists usually tend to push- neglecting the bit about most of them converting away from Judaism of course.

I don't think Raz is actually saying there were no Jews left in the area.

[Razgovory]

Its basic archaeology indeed. Yet you seem incapable of understanding it.
This early Israel mention FYI was referring to a people known as the Israelites, not land.
A quick check and I see the first origins for 'Palestine' (again talking about a people at first) in 1150BC. Which when you're talking about such ancient history where the record is so incomplete, is basically the same time.
Israel as a country was formed in the north of the modern country whilst 'Palestine'/Philistia was around Gaza.
This is something that Israel drum bangers usually have no trouble accepting. Its biblical and archaeological.

Earliest to Taino are circa 1500.  Earliest reference to the Spanish colonies in the Carribean are Circa 1500.  The Taino and the Spanish didn't arrive at the same time.

And here is the big question: Where are the Jews indigenous to?

[Josquius]

Earliest to Taino are circa 1500.  Earliest reference to the Spanish colonies in the Carribean are Circa 1500.  The Taino and the Spanish didn't arrive at the same time.

There's a complete lack of other sources about the Caribbean before this time.
Not so Canaan.
But ultimately irrelevant as we're not talking about a people here, your entire argument is based on names.

And here is the big question: Where are the Jews indigenous to?

Which Jews? Jews are pretty well known for being a widespread and diverse people.
If you have to pick a spot it'd be the same place as the Palestinians but really, people don't work that way.

Showing this area destroyed by Hezbollah, mentioning they claimed to be targeting military areas but had clearly hit a civilian area....then showing the result of Israel's strike in Lebanon, where they've made a significantly larger crater in the middle of a town.

This is a good example of why people that don't know anything maybe shouldn't talk. The size of a crater doesn't indicate whether the target was civilian or not or how much care was taken. There are plenty of places in Lebanon that are just going to be large Hezbollah weapons depots.

It certainly looked like a residential area and the casualties reflected this...

[Razgovory]

My point was that Palestinians were first referenced as invaders, not natives.  They were attacking Egypt.  The Egyptians moved them to Caanan.  Israelites were named as a people already in situ.

Am I indigenous anywhere?  Are you?  Or does it "not work that way"?

[The Minsky Moment]

For a lot of reasons, I don't think modern Palestinians think of themselves as the inheritors of the Philistine heritage, despite the name. If I'm wrong about that, it's pretty weird.

[Valmy]

I generally only think the concept of indigenous is a useful distinction in the Americas and Australia and some other colonized islands where the original people are now a minority. It gets rather obnoxious in the Old World.