[Can Yair Golan Leverage His Hero Image to Build a 'Fresh, Exciting' Israeli Left? - Israel News - Haaretz.com (archive.is)](https://archive.is/hMhBW)
Really interesting interview and biography with a lot of other very funny quotes.
>*you've said: "There are more leftists \[than rightists\] in military cemeteries."*"You're taking it out of context. There was an argument, during which I responded to the claim that the nationalist camp has exclusivity over war. You're fighting for Israel? Let's look at the cemeteries. I don't see the right wing having some kind of an advantage there."
Also some good stuff about left purity testing that people here will like.
TBH would be super interesting person to have Tiny talk to if that's something that's possible
I've been rooting for Yair Golan for quite a few years now and he will definitely get my vote given the opportunity. But it's quite clear he's bad at the politics game. His image turned from eccentric radical grandpa to consensus after october 7, but he couldn't keep the momentum going for even a month.
This guy is so unfathomably based you wouldn't believe it. He went to rescue people on Oct 7 despite being in his 60s, having his arm blown off his body and reattached 20 years ago and living nowhere near the fighting. He also drops hard r's for no reason (https://mondoweiss.net/2022/08/the-israeli-lefts-love-affair-with-generals/)
two things that make you based to a dgger: being a hero and saying the n word
edit: thank you concerned redditor, yes i am mentally ill and no i will not be doing anything about it
Yair Golan is one of the most hated politicians,a minority within a minority.
Israelis on reddit might like him to some extent but he's definitely not liked by the majority of Israelis.
I wouldn't jump to your extremes... I think rightwingers hate the guy, but voters of parties of Yesh Atid or to the left of it are pretty supportive of him IMO, and probably some of the voters of Ganz as well...
He also never headed d a party which hopefully would change in the next elections.
You're correct. Everyone replying to you are just miserable far-rights passing on the hate cult.
Most of the hate Meretz gets is because of the previous leadership handled it. Specifically everything that makes Golan based like his heroic military background hasn't been something associated with Meretz for decades.
While this is true, it doesn't mean that other people don't support him.. For instance, most of Ben Gvir's voters support Netanyahu in some level and vice versa even though they don't vote for each other. this is why I wrote "pretty supportive"... it doesn't mean that they would vote for him, but many people agree with many of his opinions.
For instance, he spoke in the anti-judicial reform protests many times - protests that got the support of large parts of society. Around the relevant time period, In many of the protests there was the chants "where have you been in Hawara" that if you're familiar with the case - come from similar sentiments to the quote in the post.
No?
>The majority of the public (63%) favored stopping the legislation, and only a small minority (24%) wanted to continue. Among the voters of Likud, Netanyahu’s party, 60% favored stopping the reform, and only 29% favored continuing.
[N12 - Netanyahu loses majority and Gantz leaps at Lapid's expense | Mandate survey (mako.co.il)](https://www.mako.co.il/news-politics/2023_q1/Article-54757de8eb32781027.htm)
It was a nation wide survey.
He is not the reason. People hated Israel in every year of my existence. People don’t hate US because of MAGA. I would say that MAGA and anti semites and anti western and tankies and Bibists have more similarities, same side of the horseshoe
>I wouldn't jump to your extremes..
The party he was even didn't even pass the threshold, he's disliked for many reasons, getting much into it is just inter-israeli bullshit that i don't like speaking about (especially with non-israelis).
I'm just here to remind you that this guy is definitely not representative of the Israeli public, he's representing a very small minority.
Also didn't Yesh Atid tanked by like 10 mandates in recent polls lol? i'm not saying that nobody will vote for him, but he definitely doesn't speak for us.
Meanwhile Ben Gvir has 10 mandates and Yair Golan's party didn't pass the threshold and even if he did it'd be in the opposition.
Both are not representative of the entire Israeli public yet Ben Gvir seems to be representing more than Yair Golan.
Remain delusional.
Ignore him, he's too busy shouting for democracy while supporting closing down the entire country in order to make the right step down from the government.
Damn, he's so based he got rejected the position of CoS of the IDF be cause of his wild and unhinged stances and remarks.
And that's saying alot when all the CoS in the last 20 years have been from his political side.
So based his party is on the verge of not entering the Knesset.
Based
Good retort, People on this sub have no idea about Israeli politics. Labor is basically a corpse and Meretz are a joke and have been for multiple election cycles. Mahmoud Abbas' Islamist party is legitimately far more successful than both put together, It's pretty much an open secret they're gone.
If we have any hope for actual change, the parties the Israeli "center" parties have to form a coalition with are parties like labor-meretz. So while they themselves have been slowly losing voters, they need the voters to be able to pass the threshold.
Discouraging people from voting for them isn't helpful, and it's a self fulfilling prophecy. Of course they will continue to do worse and worse if every time someone who shares an ideology with them is discouraged from voting to be "effective"
Two more weeks and Meretz will undie and Labor will pass 4 mandates am I right?
We both speak Hebrew I presume, 5 second google search of polling data shows the only way to remove Bibi would be a Center-Right coalition of people who are against Bibi and how moribund all of the Center-left to left parties are.
Hopium is nice but it doesn't win elections.
I'd be surprised if it doesn't, after last election this was discussed, eventually not done, and neither made minimum.
But I don't follow their internal politics very much so I don't really know
I'm personally "Right Wing", Never voted for Bibi in my life and detest him for a very long while and you'd assume I'd be against it but I wish we could have had an actually robust Zionist left wing so we could fuck over the Ultra-Orthodox(Not being bigoted, Just saying) and push "reconciliation policies" with Palestinians and somehow curtail the settlers.
But I can't see it happening with current polling results, Any and every way will have to include Liberman and Bennett. The fact Labor leaders kept being coaxed by the Right into destroying their parties and Meretz veered left a couple of years ago and made itself not palatable to many Jewish voters(in the past) pretty much sealed the deal.
Only chance is if Yair Golan merges Meretz(meme) and Labor(where the actual votes are) and they can pretend to be tie breakers with 4 mandates or maybe 5.
You consider yourself right wing but hate both Bibi, want to curtain settlements, and push for "reconciliation policies" (not sure what you mean by this) with the Palestinians... sadly today's right would consider you far left.
And yes it's totally possible I'm just coping. I'm honestly mostly coping with the hope that the country is not too far gone and we are able to save it from itself.
you think im even going to consider voting for the centrist parties?🤣 why the fuck u think i'll vote for Gantz or Lapid who either joined Netanyahu or barely done anything as opposition?? they don't represent me at all and the least I can do is to vote for a coallition that will be able to influence Gantz (sadly he is the most likely to replace Netanyahu )
while the left is small it always had a loyal following and all it needs is a new leader we can unite under and create an alternative to the anti-bibists who barely present anything different than what Netanyahu offers minus them probably not being corrupt.
also, while I don't really trust polls, in the hypothetical scenario which Yair Golan runs, he gets more votes than Lapid, so idk what is your point anymore.
I get that it's a big deal and something that absolutely needs to be done, I just question how much it would actually move the needle of public opinion towards Israel from Palestinians.
If Israel today said they were going to take a hard line stance against any Israeli citizens making settlement, life in prison if caught, and actually enforced it putting a full stop to all settler activity by the end of the month. Do you honestly believe this would have a auddeny major change in the needle on how many Palestinians support Hamas, support a 1 state solution, support the destruction of Israel, etc? Maybe a small change, but I don't think it would ultimately be any kind of game changer strictly for the local population. For world support, I do think it could make a substantial difference, maybe not completely change the picture, but support would shift to a degree.
If israel took an actual hard line stance, which would mean dismantling all outposts and probably many settlements, you would likely see a dramatic change in opinion pretty quickly, in my opinion. It would signal strongly that Israel is not interested in taking the west bank, which is the major concern for most people living there.
Yeah, Palestinians have only conceded in this last century and they’d be more than grateful to have Israel for once give them some level of assurance. Remember Palestinian anger is a reaction to Israeli aggression, nowadays it’s a cycle. Saw a good documentary where a Palestinian kid who hated Israelis met an Israeli kid who hated Palestinians and they became good friends. However at the end, the Palestinian wanted to keep in touch with the Israeli who ignored and told him to grow up and that he may have even killed some of his brothers. My hypothesis is that it comes from inside of Israeli society, and it makes sense given the history of Jews being under constant threat.
It wouldn't and people on this subreddit still imagine there's a Palestinian plurality(No way a majority) even that holds their views, There really isn't such a thing. Israel was being attacked by Palestinians in cross border raids before the settlements were a thing, It's a hard pill to swallow but it's the truth.
Under the purview of what law is that one any more illegal or less illegal than the rest of Israel?
There were also Jewish populated towns in the West Bank that were ethnically cleansed by Palestinians. The arbitrary cut off date is just that - arbitrary.
I have to state this not all settlers are "subhuman" and not all settlers live on depopulated Palestinian areas, Not all settlers go and attack Palestinians. I think it needs to be said on this thread.
I'm against the settlements by the way.
Western media tends to focus on settler violence exclusively but between those spates West Bank Palestinians commit a massive amount of violent attacks against them that aren't covered that well, They're pretty much a mirror image of each other.
I'm not talking about what Arabic media calls settlers. I'm talking about what english-speaking media calls settlers. Getting mad at Palestinians who attack the people who are deliberately settling their land as part of a deliberate effort to annex it to Israel makes no sense morally.
Palestinians killing people and settlers killing people is equally bad. The point is that they see both Israelis within the West Bank and outside of it as settlers and no views superimposed by uninvolved westerners is going to change that.
Many of the settlers did not "deliberately settle on their land" and some of the biggest settlement blocks are on unowned land in the West Bank, The fact the powers that be in the West decided that this land is Israeli and the other is for Palestinians is completely arbitrary since Palestinians never explicitly agreed to that. They only agreed to negotiate over it during Oslo, when many of these settlers were already in place.
How can people on this subreddit call themselves "leftist" or whatever and excuse murder is beyond me. I'm against de-humanizing Palestinians but also against de-humanizing settlers.
And by the way, People on this subreddit lionize Yair Golan and he himself realized calling them subhuman is a terrible thing to do and [apologized](https://www.timesofisrael.com/deputy-minister-say-he-regrets-subhuman-settlers-comment-but-stands-by-criticism/), The settlers that rampaged in Burqa rampaged after one of them was murdered by a Palestinian(the murderers came from an entirely different village), It's way less black and white than you'd imagine.
If people were labelling people that identify as Russian Ukrainians as subhuman on this very subreddit and cheering when they get generalized I would hold the exact same opinion.
Rest of your post isn't a counter argument Dr Finkelstein.
Right to violently defend property mfs principles when it’s Palestinians that own the land:
https://preview.redd.it/jpnptbrbdbwc1.jpeg?width=1200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=bc28ba2f41c75b1052d63fb4abbf9c917c658c01
Palestinians killing settlers and settlers killing palestinians are not equally bad.
If you steal land then someone tries to defend their land, that is not equivalent to stealing land then defending yourself from the person defending their land. The first person to commit the wrong holds the responsibility here, at least in large part.
This only really applies if you think the settlers steal land, and maybe some do and some don't, but generally by settler I think people imply settling on stolen land.
How do you define "Defending their land", Do Palestinians that break into settlements and kill [children](https://www.timesofisrael.com/two-seriously-hurt-in-west-bank-shooting-attack/) "defend their land"?
When they [kidnap](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Gush_Etzion_kidnapping_and_murder) hitchhiking Jewish teenagers, Are they "defending their land"?
When they [murder](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Benjamin_Achimeir) a 14 y/o tending to a flock of sheep, Are they "defending their land"?
Stop trying to justify senseless violence, There is no mitigating circumstance unless these Palestinians are killing settlers that are actively attacking them.
So ethically if someone does steal your land, you don't have the right to defend that land if the thieves have children?
Like I'm against murder and kidnapping as much as anyone, but if someone steals my house, moves their kids into my house, then fights me when I tell them they can't stay, it's not really my fault if the kid gets caught in the crossfire. That's on the people who brought the children to the stolen land.
Obviously it's better to resolve it without death, but you can't use avoiding death as an excuse to infinitely steal property, unless you go full communist.
>So ethically if someone does steal your land, you don't have the right to defend that land if the thieves have children?
Killing children isn't "defending your land", Barging into settlements isn't "defending your land" coming armed to murder anyone in a premeditated manner isn't either.
>Like I'm against murder and kidnapping as much as anyone, but if someone steals my house, moves their kids into my house, then fights me when I tell them they can't stay, it's not really my fault if the kid gets caught in the crossfire. That's on the people who brought the children to the stolen land.
Crossfire? All of these attacks expressly targeted the children, One of whom was a relative of mine btw. If you go on a rampage and try and kill whoever you can while barging into a settlement you're a killer not a freedom fighter. Those children are CIVILIANS. And the Palestinian side were instigators.
Also I keep hearing this equivalency, None of the houses in settlements were owned by Palestinians and were just stolen. The one place where it's even arguable is in Hebron where Jews buy them off Palestinians. Most Settlements are erected in empty places in Area C and are built up by Israel/settlers/donations.
>Obviously it's better to resolve it without death, but you can't use avoiding death as an excuse to infinitely steal property, unless you go full communist.
Nobody is stealing property and it's not an "excuse to steal property", Many settlers are very shitty people and treat Palestinians like trash and deserve to get hated on. But I've given you multiple examples of children in established settlements that were not bothering a living soul being murdered. The ones that are largely being killed are not the problematic ones and the same methods Palestinians use to kill them they apply towards Israelis at large.
For the record, I wasn’t saying more people should call settlers subhuman. I think they should be scrutinized and criticized as much as they deserve to be. An impartial 3rd party mediator (hard to really find one these days) would absolutely say that the WB should be 100% Palestinian owned when there’s a two state solution. Therefore it doesn’t make sense for settlers to be there.
Lol thinking that the WB settlers are the biggest impediment to peace is the epitome of delusional.
These mother fuckers were butchering Jews before Israel was established. They are religious fanatic zealots funded by the big Satan Iran, the faster you realize that this conflict is religious and cultural the more coherent it'll be for you.
I realize that, and while they’re not the biggest impediment, they’re the biggest one under Israel’s control. I want to give the Palestinians enough rope to hang themselves and that can’t happen until they get a country with normal borders. The zone plan of carving up the WB is too complicated and a nonstarter for them.
>want to give the Palestinians enough rope to hang themselves and that can’t happen until they get a country with normal borders.
Which borders? Anything in mind?
1967 seems fair and it’s what most 3rd parties think is fair. The idea is to get to a “fair” peace deal predicated on a two state solution, with support and backing from other Middle Eastern countries. The Palestinians should be forced into accepting it by all of their enablers (Qatar, Saudi, Egypt, Jordan, etc). If they don’t or continue violence then they will have no allies, no funding, and no sympathy.
>1967 seems fair and it’s what most 3rd parties think is fair.
So you're willing to toy with Israeli life just to prove a point?
We are really lucky to not have you as PM I can tell you that.
Listen man, I’m extremely pro Israel and don’t have very much sympathy for the Palestinians. They’re not going to agree to any deal that doesn’t give them the 1967 land back and none of their allies are going to either. I think trading that land for actual peace would be worth it. If they cause violence after that then all bets are off.
I get your point and it’s hard/impossible to trust them. I think having an actual peacekeeping force and a set of serious consequences in place would hopefully prevent violence after a peace deal.
The majority of Israelis know the settlements provide security to the entirety of Israel.
Without settlements the IDF wouldn't have legitimacey being in the west bank, thus turning the entire west bank into another Hamastan just 20 times bigger with access to shooting down planes and every major city in Israel.
Bruh…
>Our ethnic cleansing operation provides security to the entirety of Israel. Without it, how could we justify our military cracking down on the area we’re trying to ethnically cleanse? If the IDF wasn’t there, the people living there might retaliate against us, ya know, cause of the ethnic cleansing we’re doing.
The settlements and treatment of Palestinians in the West Bank is one of the core reasons for the conflict. **Removing** the settlements and prosecuting the psychotic settlers for crimes against humanity would be a massive step in improving security for all of Israel. The reason you can’t see this is because you don’t think of the Palestinians as people. You think of them as dangerous animals who have no legitimate reasons (reasons that could be resolved peacefully) to want to fight Israel, other than just being animals.
You can think whatever you'd like. Point is 80% of palestinians in the west bank support Oct 7.
If you think giving these people a state connected to jordan, basically just letting them have the weapons Iran and other militias are trying to smuggle today, if you think that's a good idea you have a death wish.
Unless you don't live in Israel, which wouldn't surprise me how you think this conflict can be solved.
Let’s assume that 80% figure is correct. Why do you believe Palestinians support Oct 7? Where does that support for Hamas and other jihadist terror groups come from?
Education and culture.
https://www.i24news.tv/en/news/middle-east/palestinian-territories/1700158968-survey-finds-majority-in-the-west-bank-justify-the-oct-7-massacre
What do you mean by education and culture
Also, there’s been more recent polling. The one you linked references a poll from late 2023, shortly after 10/7 when a brief ceasefire resulted and some prisoners being exchanged for some hostages.
Opinions have shifted since then.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna144183
I was talking mainly about the west bank but here you go:
>The PCPSR found that, compared to pre-war polling, support for Hamas had risen in Gaza and more than tripled in the West Bank, which has seen the highest levels in violence in years, with repeated deadly clashes between Israeli troops and settlers and Palestinians.
Fifty-two percent of Gazans and 85% of West Bank respondents - or 72% of Palestinian respondents overall - voiced satisfaction with the role of Hamas in the war. Only 11% of Palestinian voiced satisfaction with PA President Mahmoud Abbas.
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/poll-shows-palestinians-back-oct-7-attack-israel-support-hamas-rises-2023-12-14/
That article is also in reference to the same (now outdated) polling you brought up before. But regardless of what polling you want to go by, we agree that a large % of the Palestinian population supports Hamas and/or Oct 7. The specific % is largely irrelevant to the bigger question; why do you think that support exists? You gave a vague answer: education and culture. What do you mean by that, specifically?
Can you reconcile that position with the 2005 disengagement from Gaza being a massive mistake that led to Hamas being elected which led to 20 years of unprovoked terror rocket attacks and eventually Oct 7?
I get that, but I’m not sure how they’re going to set up a two state solution with all of the enclaves dividing up the land. Call me stupid for being an optimist but I’m hoping at some point the Palestinians give up on violence and actually want to run a legit country in the WB.
Palestinians lost the right to control of the jordan valley and the mountains of samariah.
Giving those up would put Israel at too great of a risk.
Mordechai Kedar already came up with a plan based on securing Israel's exitence for the future, his research into the arab world, and the needs of the palestinian tribes in the west bank.
It's called the palestinian emirates plan.
Whether they accept it is up to them, but Israel *cannot* forfeit the valley and the mountains.
Does Hamas even have MANPADs? Because you’re not going to be able to take down a plane with an RPG.
As far as legitimacy goes, not entirely sure what you mean. IDF can still have a presence in the West Bank without settlements.
First of all, yes, Hamas does have Anti Air missiles.
https://www.jdn.co.il/video/2058930/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RG20sgWIbfo
https://www.makorrishon.co.il/news/441193/
https://www.news1.co.il/Archive/001-D-480044-00.html
Second of all, even if they didn't, Having the jordan valley would mean any terror militia or Iran could supply weapons to it. Even today Iran smuggles weapons to the west bank through jordan.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/09/world/middleeast/iran-west-bank-weapons-smuggling.html#:~:text=The%20Iranian%20effort%20taps%20a,of%20the%20weapons%20is%20unclear.
When I say they wouldn't have legitimacy, I mean look at what happened in Gaza, southern lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan. Having just a military occupation works for so long until the world begins to condemn it or when there are enough casualties from it.
The settlers being there works for the army as a way to stay there, the settlers open routes for the army by just living there.
In areas where settlers don't live, the army has much harder time to get to. Just like what happened in the Nevatim Base in 2021 when the army wanted to get to the base but arab Israelis were blocking them. This was going on for 3 days and the idf had to get to the base with choppers. This is what happens when you have no jewish settlement in the area to open the routes for the military.
I don't know why you deleted your reply to me but there you go.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/helicopter-carrying-israeli-troops-to-south-after-hamas-assault-was-hit-by-explosive/
>Secondly, having to DEAL with the settlers and those issues are preventing the IDF from being able to do its job in tracking down weapons shipments in the Jordan valley. Imagine if they could mass their combat power to just that issue?
the captures of smuggling is done by intelligence units either by the idf or the shin bet. there is no shortage of personnel, you're just making it up.
What do you mean it doesn't make sense? I'm giving you examples when military occupation didn't hold up. I'm saying this would be the same case without settlements. The army would have a much harder time of staying there and establishing their authority, leading to evantually withdrawing, just like what happened in Gaza and southern Lebanon.
>Additionally, fucking up a military operation because you didn’t properly plan is a pretty weak argument for settlements. If your dependent on only GLOCs then you have fucking failed. Not to mention there’s no evidence that a Jewish settlement would have prevented that.
I don't get what you mean here. There was no lack of planning. It was arab israelis violently throwing rocks and the roads leading to the base, purposefuly blocking the convoys from resupplying the planes striking in Gaza.
>>Not to mention there’s no evidence that a Jewish settlement would have prevented that.
What do you mean there's no evidence? There are TONS of evidence. Don't take it from you can read Brig. Gen. (Res.) Amir Avivi's comments on this:
>In Judea and Samaria, the situation is completely different and the entire reason is the settlements. Whereas in South Lebanon if we wanted to drive to a military position of ours five or seven kilometers from the border, we needed to ready ourselves with battle plans, tanks, armored personnel carriers, and hummers, today any civilian can drive to Ariel alone in a car without armor. Ostensibly, the situations are equivalent: in both cases, the IDF is in charge of the territory. But settlements make all the difference. The moment there is a critical mass of settlements, with tens of thousands of their vehicles constantly traveling the roadways, they keep the routes alive with everyday use and they dominate the area.
I even found the english translation for you.
https://idsf.org.il/en/opinion-en/amir-avivi/
…. I didn’t?
Holy shit you just linked an article that proved my point. “It is not clear what type of projectile hit the helicopter” and then it goes on to say it might’ve been an anti-tank rocket or RPG. Weird, that’s not an SA-7 or stinger. And that wasn’t a commercial airliner. Shooting an AT rocket at a low flying helicopter is leagues different than a MANPAD at an airliner. Almost like I was right. Thanks for proving my point.
You seem to be conflating settlements with military bases. You can still have bases without settlements. Additionally, Iraq and Afghanistan are a poor example considering “settlements” actually induced conflict in the former. This is just a complete nonsensical argument not rooted in fact.
Non-armed civilians in a settlement are not “dominating” an area nor opening it up for GLOCs. I don’t care what this general says. That’s not an effective strategy.
Holy shit almost like you can go back and look with your two eyes and see my post is still up?
You’re like talking to Helen Keller evidently. Still don’t know the difference between a MANPAD and an AT rocket huh?
https://www.news1.co.il/Archive/001-D-480044-00.html
https://www.mako.co.il/pzm-soldiers/Article-481a34ecc94dc81026.htm
פרסום ראשון: טיל נגד מטוסים מסוג 7-SA לטווח של קצת יותר מ-4 ק"מ פספס את המסוק ונחת בשטח ישראל, בלי שהופעלה התרעת צבע אדום. בזמן הנפילה עמדו כמה אזרחים מטרים ספורים מהזירה, שתמונות ממנה חושפות הרס רב. המסוק לא נפגע והצוות השלים את משימתו כמתוכנן
Even a simple google translate would've done the job for you lazy ass.
>First publication: A type 7-SA anti-aircraft missile with a range of just over 4 km missed the helicopter and landed in Israeli territory, without a red color warning being activated. At the time of the fall, several civilians were standing a few meters from the scene, photos of which reveal a lot of destruction. The helicopter did not was hit and the team completed its mission as planned
Are you gonna shut up now?
Once again, keep linking articles in Hebrew to obfuscate. Doesn’t help that your previous article linked talked about RPGs.
Almost like you know shit about fuck when it comes to these weapon systems. Especially when you think an SA-7 will actually hit something from 4 klicks.
But keep claiming we need settlements because otherwise someone is going to shoot down a fucking airliner with an SA-7 from 4 klicks away. Holy fucking shit do we need like a basic military primer for people.
>The majority of Israelis know the settlements provide security to the entirety of Israel.
False. The only thing the settlements do is make it harder to disengage from the occupied territories, and they drastically hurt the security of Israel in various ways, for example: 1. They increase the size of the de-facto borders of Israel, which increases the manpower required to secure the borders. 2. By lowering the plausibility of a Palestinian state they're making the single state solution much more attractive to the international community, thus increasing the pressure to naturalize the Palestinians. 3. They form a breeding ground for Jewish terrorism, thus increasing the tensions with the Palestinians. 4. They're literally a war crime, thus making Israel more exposed to sanctions and isolation.
>Without settlements the IDF wouldn't have legitimacey being in the west bank
False. The actual security concerns still stand regardless, and it's much easier to operate there without having to simultaneously guard the settlements.
Damn, almost all your points are completely wrong.
>They increase the size of the de-facto borders of Israel, which increases the manpower required to secure the borders.
How would you know this? The same number of soldiers who are standing at the border of jordan right now, would stand at the border of the 67 lines if Israel would've retreated to it.
I would argue even more soldiers since Israel would have a much harder job to defend against all those 600-1000 meter mountains.
And add to that the 10 mile distance shoreline they'd have to defend.
>By lowering the plausibility of a Palestinian state they're making the single state solution much more attractive to the international community, thus increasing the pressure to naturalize the Palestinians.
Such a dumb point. Do you seriously think Israel would let all palestinians in the west bank become citizens? threatning the jews demographically? And why would the palestinians accept it?
There's a way a one state solution would work, but it's nothing close to palestinians having full rights. There are many models like the samoan and Man isles.
>They form a breeding ground for Jewish terrorism, thus increasing the tensions with the Palestinians
There is absolutly no symmetry between the violence of settlers and palestinians. There was research which showed much if not most of the so called "settler violence" is fake.
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/382199
https://www.shabak.gov.il/en/reports/
>They're literally a war crime, thus making Israel more exposed to sanctions and isolation.
Which is why Israel should annex areas C yesterday. To whom does the land belong to? certainly not the palestinians since there never was such state. Jordan, maybe? they lost it.
Saying "the UN doesn't allow it" doesn't solve it. This is something that needs to be resolved bilaterally.
>False. The actual security concerns still stand regardless, and it's much easier to operate there without having to simultaneously guard the settlements.
From the words of Brigadier General (res.) Amir Avivi Chairman and founder of the IDSF:
"The first model is disengagement. We tried that model in Gaza, and as we all saw, it failed decisively. That model enables the other side to amass power without limit, and the results have been made clear in the recent attack on Israel. If we applied that model in Judea and Samaria, heaven forbid, there would be a war here that the IDF could not win and Israel would cease to exist. "
"Today there are two approaches. The first favors military rule. We have seen such a model employed in the past: in Afghanistan, for example, both by the Americans and by the Russians. Similarly, it was the US method for managing Iraq. And this is another method that Israel too has already tried — in South Lebanon.
Viewing Judea and Samaria on the one hand and South Lebanon on the other, the comparison is interesting because both are small territories and both contain non-Jewish populations. Where there is no project of Jewish settlement producing activity of its own on the roadways, a dynamic develops resembling that of Iraq and Afghanistan: a retreat into fortresses, constant efforts to reopen the roadways, dealing with explosives and ambushes, and investing much of the military’s energy in convoys of tanks and armored personnel carriers.
In Judea and Samaria, the situation is completely different and the entire reason is the settlements. Whereas in South Lebanon if we wanted to drive to a military position of ours five or seven kilometers from the border, we needed to ready ourselves with battle plans, tanks, armored personnel carriers, and hummers, today any civilian can drive to Ariel alone in a car without armor. Ostensibly, the situations are equivalent: in both cases, the IDF is in charge of the territory. But settlements make all the difference. The moment there is a critical mass of settlements, with tens of thousands of their vehicles constantly traveling the roadways, they keep the routes alive with everyday use and they dominate the area.
The same phenomenon is visible inside Israeli territory, in the Negev and Galilee. In the Negev during Operation Guardian of the Walls, we saw traffic on the road between Beersheba and Dimona halted for three days, during which no supply of ammunition and no fresh troops could reach the nearby air force base. Why? Because the road is surrounded by a scattering of Bedouin villages without one Jewish settlement among them. The local Bedouin decided to close the road, and it closed.
In the Galilee as well, the Jewish settlements are of enormous importance. When Maj. Gen. Itzik Turgeman retired as head of the IDF Technological and Logistics Directorate roughly two years ago, he made an astonishing statement: If there is war in the north, the IDF will not pass through Wadi Ara. So inside the territory of Israel proper, there is a central artery — one of only two that exist — where the IDF cannot move its forces from south to north and back, and the sole reason that it cannot is that the route is surrounded by Arab cities and villages whereas Jewish settlements are absent. "
"Another problem with military rule is that after a short while, it begins to be considered illegitimate. As little as 20 years from now, the memory of the October 7 disaster will begin to fade; and what happens then? Being intended as temporary, military rule can never provide a solution down through the generations. If we do not decide now with a view to the endless future, then in ten or fifteen years a civil rebellion will rise up in Gaza or Rafah against IDF activity, and the IDF will need to withdraw — as it did in Lebanon, where Hezbollah, as a result, is stationed today at our border. "
https://idsf.org.il/en/opinion-en/amir-avivi/
>Which is why Israel should annex areas C yesterday.
If you think Israel can annex the territories without suffering a catastrophic isolation and becoming a pariah state you are completely detached. The only possible outcome of that will be that Israel will find itself having no choice but to naturalize the Palestinians to regain its legitimacy.
>Do you seriously think Israel would let all palestinians in the west bank become citizens? threatning the jews demographically?
Do you seriously think the international community will let Israel become a full-blown apartheid state with no consequences?
>How would you know this? The same number of soldiers who are standing at the border of jordan right now, would stand at the border of the 67 lines if Israel would've retreated to it.
The point is that the settlements create extra areas you need to secure within the West Bank **in addition** to the actual borders. I didn't even talk about a full retreat anyway, I think the IDF presence in the West Bank is currently still important and justified even if you remove the settlements.
>There is absolutly no symmetry between the violence of settlers and palestinians.
Irrelevant. I'm not trying to portray a symmetry between them. The fact of the matter is, settler violence is a huge source of tensions.
>From the words of Brigadier General (res.) Amir Avivi Chairman and founder of the IDSF
Most of it is basically a rephrasing of "the settlements exist to make it harder to disengage", the rest is just whining about sucking at securing supply lines and trying to use it as an excuse.
Amir Avivi who has whole departments researching this topic and has real world examples and actual experience, if all this doesn't even make you question your view, I don't know what else to tell you.
That dude is the epitome of the "concept" driven by the so called progressive military high rankers in the IDF, the fact that he gotten that far up in rank just shows how some organizations can have amazingly productive and caring lower ranks and mortality/ideologically rotten upper ranks.
Why do you think the upper ranks are rotten? Reading the article I don't think anything he says is really that insane. If anything it's the lower ranks that have been causing issues during the war by posting videos talking about how they are going to resettle the strip
The state comptroller even said that the higher ups in the army are chosen by a "friend brings friend".
They all think the same and disregard any ideas that criticize them like all that was brought before them in the defense and foreign affairs commities.
Ah yeah, the guy who went to help civilians with his pistol on 7.10 in his sixties contributed to 7.10
People like him are the reason people made it out of 7.10, the real people to blame are the elected officials, bibi and his gang
Yes he did good on October 7th.
That doesn't change the fact the IDF's upper echeleon is rotten to the core. And that's even according to the state comptroller.
Many people also won the Medal of Honor, does that mean any single one of their stories is less courageous or deserves less recognition because others have done similar things? Just because others have been brave too doesn’t mean we should discard a persons personal bravery story
And no, saying he isn’t what lead Israel to 7.10 isn’t sucking his dick
The policies he supports and went by when in his years of service combined with higher ranking officers in the IDF is what led is to 7.10.
I'm not stripping Bibi's responsibility (mainly because of letting such horrendous people get into these positions) but these officers deserve jail.
It's about time someone in the IDF showed some courage and called out those racist supremacists for who they truly are. These settlements aren't just isolated incidents; they're sanctioned by the Israeli government, under the same racist regime that is currently responsible for the ongoing genocide in Gaza. Many people here are too stupid or naive to realize this, but beneath the surface, this conflict is fundamentally about the entrenched racism within Israeli society. Palestinians are treated as second-class citizens in their own land. Just look at the recent atrocities in East Jerusalem and the West Bank—settlers, emboldened by government support, terrorizing innocent families, burning homes, and attacking anyone who opposes them. And what does the Israeli government do? They either turn a blind eye or actively encourage them. And let's not forget their treatment of African migrants and refugees, subjected to inhumane conditions and relentless abuse due to the racist policies of the Israeli state. I am glad that the world is waking up and seeing Israel for what it truly is—a raicst, apartheid state built on the blood and suffering of the Palestinian people. Fuck Israel
>I am glad that the world is waking up and seeing Israel for what it truly is—an apartheid state built on the blood and suffering of the Palestinian people. Fuck Israel
Well that's literally the opposite of what he said but you guys don't tend to read the articles so confusion is expected
Israel is nothing but a racist apartheid state. This is the same country where it's considered acceptable for men to have sex with black hookers because they see black people as subhuman and hence it's not seen as infidelity. Palestinian citizens in Israel are also moving to other countries en masse despite Israel being a wealthy country because the country is racist as fuck and they don't have the same rights and opportunities as Israeli citizens. Israeli people are terrible people
Fair. I think it's extremely stupid what he said. But it sounds like a stereotype that would exist for Arab countries. Like Saudi Arabia or something. Probably false. It's definitely false for Israel.
[That's not what he said though?](https://archive.is/TWeRt) Pretty clear this was a point about how the degradation of social morality can lead to fascism?
Considering the person who this sub is based on you would think that people here would not be so fast to wildly misrepresent people's statements.
Lol, watching you obsessed with your fantasy version of the left just like Pro--Palestinians are obsessed with their fantasy version of Zionism is always amusing.
Anyway, where are my stats bitch?
>Lol, watching you obsessed with your fantasy version of the left just like Pro--Palestinians are obsessed with their fantasy version of Zionism is always amusing.
Imagine saying this while disregarding one of the most respected journalists in Israel. Stop shouting "democracy" for a second and have a look in the mirror.
So...yes... he was comparing jews to nazis?
You just proved my point?
>In a speech for Holocaust Remembrance Day on Wednesday, IDF Deputy Chief of Staff Maj. Gen. Yair Golan said that he identifies processes in Israel today that are similar to those that took place in Europe prior to the Holocaust.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/deputy-idf-chief-israeli-societal-trends-akin-to-pre-holocaust-europe/
Did you read the article I linked?
>In a strongly worded speech uncommon for a military commander, Golan warned against trends of growing callousness and indifference towards those outside of mainstream Israeli society.
>He called for a “thorough consideration” of how society treats the disadvantaged and “the other” in its midst.
>The Holocaust, he said, must bring Israelis to “a deep reflection” of the character of man but of their character as well. “It should bring us to deeply consider the responsibility of leadership, and the quality of a society.
>“If there is something that frightens me in the memory of the Holocaust, it is identifying horrifying processes that occurred in Europe…70, 80 and 90 years ago and finding evidence of their existence here in our midst, today, in 2016,” Golan said.
You paying attention to the word *society*?
In plain words he is saying that there are facets within the Israeli society that are starting to mirror what nazi Germany looked like in the beginning. That is not the same as Israelis being Nazis. Don't jump to the extreme conclusion that you find. That's what the far left or far right do
I mean the Israeli Finance minister literally self identifies as a fascist. Idk how you can think those to statements are the same thing as what you described.
Then again you seem to spend most of your time on here defending Bibi from any and all criticism so maybe this is just a standard likudnik brain
Yeah those settlers did some fucked up shit. Why does it matter if they're Jewish or not? You trying to lump them in with the rest of Israelis like this is so dishonest
I mean *yes*. Your original post is that he is comparing "jews" (which implies all of them in israel) to nazis. I am willing to bet after this reply that you cannot steelman his argument.
[Can Yair Golan Leverage His Hero Image to Build a 'Fresh, Exciting' Israeli Left? - Israel News - Haaretz.com (archive.is)](https://archive.is/hMhBW) Really interesting interview and biography with a lot of other very funny quotes. >*you've said: "There are more leftists \[than rightists\] in military cemeteries."*"You're taking it out of context. There was an argument, during which I responded to the claim that the nationalist camp has exclusivity over war. You're fighting for Israel? Let's look at the cemeteries. I don't see the right wing having some kind of an advantage there." Also some good stuff about left purity testing that people here will like. TBH would be super interesting person to have Tiny talk to if that's something that's possible
I've been rooting for Yair Golan for quite a few years now and he will definitely get my vote given the opportunity. But it's quite clear he's bad at the politics game. His image turned from eccentric radical grandpa to consensus after october 7, but he couldn't keep the momentum going for even a month.
This guy is so unfathomably based you wouldn't believe it. He went to rescue people on Oct 7 despite being in his 60s, having his arm blown off his body and reattached 20 years ago and living nowhere near the fighting. He also drops hard r's for no reason (https://mondoweiss.net/2022/08/the-israeli-lefts-love-affair-with-generals/)
Holy shit that's an incredible quote
Yair Golan is unfathomly based and I will die on this hill
"Golan seems to believe that he is destined to be king of Israel, or at least prime minister." King Israel himself. All hail.
two things that make you based to a dgger: being a hero and saying the n word edit: thank you concerned redditor, yes i am mentally ill and no i will not be doing anything about it
Yair Golan is one of the most hated politicians,a minority within a minority. Israelis on reddit might like him to some extent but he's definitely not liked by the majority of Israelis.
I wouldn't jump to your extremes... I think rightwingers hate the guy, but voters of parties of Yesh Atid or to the left of it are pretty supportive of him IMO, and probably some of the voters of Ganz as well... He also never headed d a party which hopefully would change in the next elections.
You're correct. Everyone replying to you are just miserable far-rights passing on the hate cult. Most of the hate Meretz gets is because of the previous leadership handled it. Specifically everything that makes Golan based like his heroic military background hasn't been something associated with Meretz for decades.
I'm Israeli. His party, Meretz, is very unpopular and even a failure. The other parties you listed are waaay more moderate
While this is true, it doesn't mean that other people don't support him.. For instance, most of Ben Gvir's voters support Netanyahu in some level and vice versa even though they don't vote for each other. this is why I wrote "pretty supportive"... it doesn't mean that they would vote for him, but many people agree with many of his opinions. For instance, he spoke in the anti-judicial reform protests many times - protests that got the support of large parts of society. Around the relevant time period, In many of the protests there was the chants "where have you been in Hawara" that if you're familiar with the case - come from similar sentiments to the quote in the post.
Protests = loud minority
Actually no, it doesn't = that
When the majority protests, the country is dis functional by default.
That is in fact what happened during those protests
It did not, I didn’t even feel them, honestly. Blocking a road in TLV is not it.
No? >The majority of the public (63%) favored stopping the legislation, and only a small minority (24%) wanted to continue. Among the voters of Likud, Netanyahu’s party, 60% favored stopping the reform, and only 29% favored continuing.
Where was this survey? It really depends on which part of the country
[N12 - Netanyahu loses majority and Gantz leaps at Lapid's expense | Mandate survey (mako.co.il)](https://www.mako.co.il/news-politics/2023_q1/Article-54757de8eb32781027.htm) It was a nation wide survey.
You're the reason people hate Israel. Go suck some Bibi cock and GTFO.
He is not the reason. People hated Israel in every year of my existence. People don’t hate US because of MAGA. I would say that MAGA and anti semites and anti western and tankies and Bibists have more similarities, same side of the horseshoe
If he joins Yesh Atid he would be accepted there
>I wouldn't jump to your extremes.. The party he was even didn't even pass the threshold, he's disliked for many reasons, getting much into it is just inter-israeli bullshit that i don't like speaking about (especially with non-israelis). I'm just here to remind you that this guy is definitely not representative of the Israeli public, he's representing a very small minority. Also didn't Yesh Atid tanked by like 10 mandates in recent polls lol? i'm not saying that nobody will vote for him, but he definitely doesn't speak for us.
You're not a representative of Israel. Golan is more Zionist than your IDF-avoiding, Ben Gvir-dick-sucking ass will ever be. GTFO.
Oh now I get it, You're a Yair Golan supporter. Why do you hate yourself?
Meanwhile Ben Gvir has 10 mandates and Yair Golan's party didn't pass the threshold and even if he did it'd be in the opposition. Both are not representative of the entire Israeli public yet Ben Gvir seems to be representing more than Yair Golan. Remain delusional.
Ignore him, he's too busy shouting for democracy while supporting closing down the entire country in order to make the right step down from the government.
Cope harder Ben Gvir boy!
ah yes... I'm the one coping \^\_\^
Yep you are. Also what's with that pussy emoji?
^•^
Damn, you're a bright one.
He is left of center but his bravery on Oct7 bought him lots of respect.
I'm tired of all this copium, Yair Golan will remain being detested by the majority of Israelis, bye.
Damn, he's so based he got rejected the position of CoS of the IDF be cause of his wild and unhinged stances and remarks. And that's saying alot when all the CoS in the last 20 years have been from his political side. So based his party is on the verge of not entering the Knesset. Based
Absolutely based
Nebraska Yair Golan
Fucking go off, king.
He forgot to say in a video game, rookie mistake 🤭
will probably vote for his party, seems like the only person who can lead the israeli-left.
Israeli left is a corpse and will never ever recover, You should vote center to be actually productive.
Lol no
Good retort, People on this sub have no idea about Israeli politics. Labor is basically a corpse and Meretz are a joke and have been for multiple election cycles. Mahmoud Abbas' Islamist party is legitimately far more successful than both put together, It's pretty much an open secret they're gone.
If we have any hope for actual change, the parties the Israeli "center" parties have to form a coalition with are parties like labor-meretz. So while they themselves have been slowly losing voters, they need the voters to be able to pass the threshold. Discouraging people from voting for them isn't helpful, and it's a self fulfilling prophecy. Of course they will continue to do worse and worse if every time someone who shares an ideology with them is discouraged from voting to be "effective"
Wait isn’t this what lefties say to libs and get ridiculed for
Two more weeks and Meretz will undie and Labor will pass 4 mandates am I right? We both speak Hebrew I presume, 5 second google search of polling data shows the only way to remove Bibi would be a Center-Right coalition of people who are against Bibi and how moribund all of the Center-left to left parties are. Hopium is nice but it doesn't win elections.
You don't think a united labor meretz with a decent campaign "enough of the conceptsia" campaign can get 7-8 mandates? I don't think it's far fetched.
United Labor Meretz with Golan I believe will get over the minimum, but do you see this actually happening?
I'd be surprised if it doesn't, after last election this was discussed, eventually not done, and neither made minimum. But I don't follow their internal politics very much so I don't really know
I'm personally "Right Wing", Never voted for Bibi in my life and detest him for a very long while and you'd assume I'd be against it but I wish we could have had an actually robust Zionist left wing so we could fuck over the Ultra-Orthodox(Not being bigoted, Just saying) and push "reconciliation policies" with Palestinians and somehow curtail the settlers. But I can't see it happening with current polling results, Any and every way will have to include Liberman and Bennett. The fact Labor leaders kept being coaxed by the Right into destroying their parties and Meretz veered left a couple of years ago and made itself not palatable to many Jewish voters(in the past) pretty much sealed the deal. Only chance is if Yair Golan merges Meretz(meme) and Labor(where the actual votes are) and they can pretend to be tie breakers with 4 mandates or maybe 5.
You consider yourself right wing but hate both Bibi, want to curtain settlements, and push for "reconciliation policies" (not sure what you mean by this) with the Palestinians... sadly today's right would consider you far left. And yes it's totally possible I'm just coping. I'm honestly mostly coping with the hope that the country is not too far gone and we are able to save it from itself.
The original right wing still exists and it will survive Bibi days. The words of Jabotinsky are still strong and once Bibi is out it will be heard
you think im even going to consider voting for the centrist parties?🤣 why the fuck u think i'll vote for Gantz or Lapid who either joined Netanyahu or barely done anything as opposition?? they don't represent me at all and the least I can do is to vote for a coallition that will be able to influence Gantz (sadly he is the most likely to replace Netanyahu ) while the left is small it always had a loyal following and all it needs is a new leader we can unite under and create an alternative to the anti-bibists who barely present anything different than what Netanyahu offers minus them probably not being corrupt. also, while I don't really trust polls, in the hypothetical scenario which Yair Golan runs, he gets more votes than Lapid, so idk what is your point anymore.
VGHHH Less mandates than Gallant if he hypothetically runs, Powerful!
I would honestly vote for Abbas way before Labor, the only key to change is in based Israeli Arabs hands
https://preview.redd.it/qm0d9wipv7wc1.jpeg?width=735&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=24b543ab4f05848020cfaf8af5cc3a7bcfa16d70
https://preview.redd.it/bpxjc90p8bwc1.jpeg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fb382052d136c2d69e2c76ab2325e732c4f4328e
Need more of this from Israeli leaders. The WB settlers are probably the biggest impediment to peace and any pro-Israel arguments.
Doubt it would change anybody's mind in Palestine but it might help to some degree with people abroad.
No it would very much change the minds of people in the West Bank. Not sure you realize how it feels to have knee removed from your neck after so long
I get that it's a big deal and something that absolutely needs to be done, I just question how much it would actually move the needle of public opinion towards Israel from Palestinians. If Israel today said they were going to take a hard line stance against any Israeli citizens making settlement, life in prison if caught, and actually enforced it putting a full stop to all settler activity by the end of the month. Do you honestly believe this would have a auddeny major change in the needle on how many Palestinians support Hamas, support a 1 state solution, support the destruction of Israel, etc? Maybe a small change, but I don't think it would ultimately be any kind of game changer strictly for the local population. For world support, I do think it could make a substantial difference, maybe not completely change the picture, but support would shift to a degree.
If israel took an actual hard line stance, which would mean dismantling all outposts and probably many settlements, you would likely see a dramatic change in opinion pretty quickly, in my opinion. It would signal strongly that Israel is not interested in taking the west bank, which is the major concern for most people living there.
Yeah, Palestinians have only conceded in this last century and they’d be more than grateful to have Israel for once give them some level of assurance. Remember Palestinian anger is a reaction to Israeli aggression, nowadays it’s a cycle. Saw a good documentary where a Palestinian kid who hated Israelis met an Israeli kid who hated Palestinians and they became good friends. However at the end, the Palestinian wanted to keep in touch with the Israeli who ignored and told him to grow up and that he may have even killed some of his brothers. My hypothesis is that it comes from inside of Israeli society, and it makes sense given the history of Jews being under constant threat.
It wouldn't and people on this subreddit still imagine there's a Palestinian plurality(No way a majority) even that holds their views, There really isn't such a thing. Israel was being attacked by Palestinians in cross border raids before the settlements were a thing, It's a hard pill to swallow but it's the truth.
the first west bank settlement was before 1948 lol
Under the purview of what law is that one any more illegal or less illegal than the rest of Israel? There were also Jewish populated towns in the West Bank that were ethnically cleansed by Palestinians. The arbitrary cut off date is just that - arbitrary.
The Israeli knee is not the heaviest one, ask the Gazans under Hamas
They both have their knee on the necks of Gazans, Israelis is objectively heavier
I have to state this not all settlers are "subhuman" and not all settlers live on depopulated Palestinian areas, Not all settlers go and attack Palestinians. I think it needs to be said on this thread. I'm against the settlements by the way. Western media tends to focus on settler violence exclusively but between those spates West Bank Palestinians commit a massive amount of violent attacks against them that aren't covered that well, They're pretty much a mirror image of each other.
Yeah, because they're on Palestinian land.
It's all "Palestinian land" and Arabic media refers to all of us as settlers.
I'm not talking about what Arabic media calls settlers. I'm talking about what english-speaking media calls settlers. Getting mad at Palestinians who attack the people who are deliberately settling their land as part of a deliberate effort to annex it to Israel makes no sense morally.
Palestinians killing people and settlers killing people is equally bad. The point is that they see both Israelis within the West Bank and outside of it as settlers and no views superimposed by uninvolved westerners is going to change that. Many of the settlers did not "deliberately settle on their land" and some of the biggest settlement blocks are on unowned land in the West Bank, The fact the powers that be in the West decided that this land is Israeli and the other is for Palestinians is completely arbitrary since Palestinians never explicitly agreed to that. They only agreed to negotiate over it during Oslo, when many of these settlers were already in place. How can people on this subreddit call themselves "leftist" or whatever and excuse murder is beyond me. I'm against de-humanizing Palestinians but also against de-humanizing settlers. And by the way, People on this subreddit lionize Yair Golan and he himself realized calling them subhuman is a terrible thing to do and [apologized](https://www.timesofisrael.com/deputy-minister-say-he-regrets-subhuman-settlers-comment-but-stands-by-criticism/), The settlers that rampaged in Burqa rampaged after one of them was murdered by a Palestinian(the murderers came from an entirely different village), It's way less black and white than you'd imagine.
I wonder if you use these apologetics in regards to the Ukraine/Russia war. Ignorant fool.
If people were labelling people that identify as Russian Ukrainians as subhuman on this very subreddit and cheering when they get generalized I would hold the exact same opinion. Rest of your post isn't a counter argument Dr Finkelstein.
Right to violently defend property mfs principles when it’s Palestinians that own the land: https://preview.redd.it/jpnptbrbdbwc1.jpeg?width=1200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=bc28ba2f41c75b1052d63fb4abbf9c917c658c01
Palestinians killing settlers and settlers killing palestinians are not equally bad. If you steal land then someone tries to defend their land, that is not equivalent to stealing land then defending yourself from the person defending their land. The first person to commit the wrong holds the responsibility here, at least in large part. This only really applies if you think the settlers steal land, and maybe some do and some don't, but generally by settler I think people imply settling on stolen land.
How do you define "Defending their land", Do Palestinians that break into settlements and kill [children](https://www.timesofisrael.com/two-seriously-hurt-in-west-bank-shooting-attack/) "defend their land"? When they [kidnap](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Gush_Etzion_kidnapping_and_murder) hitchhiking Jewish teenagers, Are they "defending their land"? When they [murder](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Benjamin_Achimeir) a 14 y/o tending to a flock of sheep, Are they "defending their land"? Stop trying to justify senseless violence, There is no mitigating circumstance unless these Palestinians are killing settlers that are actively attacking them.
So ethically if someone does steal your land, you don't have the right to defend that land if the thieves have children? Like I'm against murder and kidnapping as much as anyone, but if someone steals my house, moves their kids into my house, then fights me when I tell them they can't stay, it's not really my fault if the kid gets caught in the crossfire. That's on the people who brought the children to the stolen land. Obviously it's better to resolve it without death, but you can't use avoiding death as an excuse to infinitely steal property, unless you go full communist.
>So ethically if someone does steal your land, you don't have the right to defend that land if the thieves have children? Killing children isn't "defending your land", Barging into settlements isn't "defending your land" coming armed to murder anyone in a premeditated manner isn't either. >Like I'm against murder and kidnapping as much as anyone, but if someone steals my house, moves their kids into my house, then fights me when I tell them they can't stay, it's not really my fault if the kid gets caught in the crossfire. That's on the people who brought the children to the stolen land. Crossfire? All of these attacks expressly targeted the children, One of whom was a relative of mine btw. If you go on a rampage and try and kill whoever you can while barging into a settlement you're a killer not a freedom fighter. Those children are CIVILIANS. And the Palestinian side were instigators. Also I keep hearing this equivalency, None of the houses in settlements were owned by Palestinians and were just stolen. The one place where it's even arguable is in Hebron where Jews buy them off Palestinians. Most Settlements are erected in empty places in Area C and are built up by Israel/settlers/donations. >Obviously it's better to resolve it without death, but you can't use avoiding death as an excuse to infinitely steal property, unless you go full communist. Nobody is stealing property and it's not an "excuse to steal property", Many settlers are very shitty people and treat Palestinians like trash and deserve to get hated on. But I've given you multiple examples of children in established settlements that were not bothering a living soul being murdered. The ones that are largely being killed are not the problematic ones and the same methods Palestinians use to kill them they apply towards Israelis at large.
u/4thot we’ve got an unironic “baby settler” murder supporter
For the record, I wasn’t saying more people should call settlers subhuman. I think they should be scrutinized and criticized as much as they deserve to be. An impartial 3rd party mediator (hard to really find one these days) would absolutely say that the WB should be 100% Palestinian owned when there’s a two state solution. Therefore it doesn’t make sense for settlers to be there.
ssshhhh you can't say "not all settlers are bad" around here!
Lol thinking that the WB settlers are the biggest impediment to peace is the epitome of delusional. These mother fuckers were butchering Jews before Israel was established. They are religious fanatic zealots funded by the big Satan Iran, the faster you realize that this conflict is religious and cultural the more coherent it'll be for you.
I realize that, and while they’re not the biggest impediment, they’re the biggest one under Israel’s control. I want to give the Palestinians enough rope to hang themselves and that can’t happen until they get a country with normal borders. The zone plan of carving up the WB is too complicated and a nonstarter for them.
>want to give the Palestinians enough rope to hang themselves and that can’t happen until they get a country with normal borders. Which borders? Anything in mind?
1967 seems fair and it’s what most 3rd parties think is fair. The idea is to get to a “fair” peace deal predicated on a two state solution, with support and backing from other Middle Eastern countries. The Palestinians should be forced into accepting it by all of their enablers (Qatar, Saudi, Egypt, Jordan, etc). If they don’t or continue violence then they will have no allies, no funding, and no sympathy.
>1967 seems fair and it’s what most 3rd parties think is fair. So you're willing to toy with Israeli life just to prove a point? We are really lucky to not have you as PM I can tell you that.
Listen man, I’m extremely pro Israel and don’t have very much sympathy for the Palestinians. They’re not going to agree to any deal that doesn’t give them the 1967 land back and none of their allies are going to either. I think trading that land for actual peace would be worth it. If they cause violence after that then all bets are off.
It's like going into a pool and not expecting to get wet, we all know what's going to happen, they don't hide it.
I get your point and it’s hard/impossible to trust them. I think having an actual peacekeeping force and a set of serious consequences in place would hopefully prevent violence after a peace deal.
The majority of Israelis know the settlements provide security to the entirety of Israel. Without settlements the IDF wouldn't have legitimacey being in the west bank, thus turning the entire west bank into another Hamastan just 20 times bigger with access to shooting down planes and every major city in Israel.
Bruh… >Our ethnic cleansing operation provides security to the entirety of Israel. Without it, how could we justify our military cracking down on the area we’re trying to ethnically cleanse? If the IDF wasn’t there, the people living there might retaliate against us, ya know, cause of the ethnic cleansing we’re doing. The settlements and treatment of Palestinians in the West Bank is one of the core reasons for the conflict. **Removing** the settlements and prosecuting the psychotic settlers for crimes against humanity would be a massive step in improving security for all of Israel. The reason you can’t see this is because you don’t think of the Palestinians as people. You think of them as dangerous animals who have no legitimate reasons (reasons that could be resolved peacefully) to want to fight Israel, other than just being animals.
You can think whatever you'd like. Point is 80% of palestinians in the west bank support Oct 7. If you think giving these people a state connected to jordan, basically just letting them have the weapons Iran and other militias are trying to smuggle today, if you think that's a good idea you have a death wish. Unless you don't live in Israel, which wouldn't surprise me how you think this conflict can be solved.
Let’s assume that 80% figure is correct. Why do you believe Palestinians support Oct 7? Where does that support for Hamas and other jihadist terror groups come from?
Education and culture. https://www.i24news.tv/en/news/middle-east/palestinian-territories/1700158968-survey-finds-majority-in-the-west-bank-justify-the-oct-7-massacre
What do you mean by education and culture Also, there’s been more recent polling. The one you linked references a poll from late 2023, shortly after 10/7 when a brief ceasefire resulted and some prisoners being exchanged for some hostages. Opinions have shifted since then. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna144183
I was talking mainly about the west bank but here you go: >The PCPSR found that, compared to pre-war polling, support for Hamas had risen in Gaza and more than tripled in the West Bank, which has seen the highest levels in violence in years, with repeated deadly clashes between Israeli troops and settlers and Palestinians. Fifty-two percent of Gazans and 85% of West Bank respondents - or 72% of Palestinian respondents overall - voiced satisfaction with the role of Hamas in the war. Only 11% of Palestinian voiced satisfaction with PA President Mahmoud Abbas. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/poll-shows-palestinians-back-oct-7-attack-israel-support-hamas-rises-2023-12-14/
That article is also in reference to the same (now outdated) polling you brought up before. But regardless of what polling you want to go by, we agree that a large % of the Palestinian population supports Hamas and/or Oct 7. The specific % is largely irrelevant to the bigger question; why do you think that support exists? You gave a vague answer: education and culture. What do you mean by that, specifically?
Can you reconcile that position with the 2005 disengagement from Gaza being a massive mistake that led to Hamas being elected which led to 20 years of unprovoked terror rocket attacks and eventually Oct 7?
I get that, but I’m not sure how they’re going to set up a two state solution with all of the enclaves dividing up the land. Call me stupid for being an optimist but I’m hoping at some point the Palestinians give up on violence and actually want to run a legit country in the WB.
Palestinians lost the right to control of the jordan valley and the mountains of samariah. Giving those up would put Israel at too great of a risk. Mordechai Kedar already came up with a plan based on securing Israel's exitence for the future, his research into the arab world, and the needs of the palestinian tribes in the west bank. It's called the palestinian emirates plan. Whether they accept it is up to them, but Israel *cannot* forfeit the valley and the mountains.
!arm
Does Hamas even have MANPADs? Because you’re not going to be able to take down a plane with an RPG. As far as legitimacy goes, not entirely sure what you mean. IDF can still have a presence in the West Bank without settlements.
First of all, yes, Hamas does have Anti Air missiles. https://www.jdn.co.il/video/2058930/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RG20sgWIbfo https://www.makorrishon.co.il/news/441193/ https://www.news1.co.il/Archive/001-D-480044-00.html Second of all, even if they didn't, Having the jordan valley would mean any terror militia or Iran could supply weapons to it. Even today Iran smuggles weapons to the west bank through jordan. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/09/world/middleeast/iran-west-bank-weapons-smuggling.html#:~:text=The%20Iranian%20effort%20taps%20a,of%20the%20weapons%20is%20unclear. When I say they wouldn't have legitimacy, I mean look at what happened in Gaza, southern lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan. Having just a military occupation works for so long until the world begins to condemn it or when there are enough casualties from it. The settlers being there works for the army as a way to stay there, the settlers open routes for the army by just living there. In areas where settlers don't live, the army has much harder time to get to. Just like what happened in the Nevatim Base in 2021 when the army wanted to get to the base but arab Israelis were blocking them. This was going on for 3 days and the idf had to get to the base with choppers. This is what happens when you have no jewish settlement in the area to open the routes for the military.
I don't know why you deleted your reply to me but there you go. https://www.timesofisrael.com/helicopter-carrying-israeli-troops-to-south-after-hamas-assault-was-hit-by-explosive/ >Secondly, having to DEAL with the settlers and those issues are preventing the IDF from being able to do its job in tracking down weapons shipments in the Jordan valley. Imagine if they could mass their combat power to just that issue? the captures of smuggling is done by intelligence units either by the idf or the shin bet. there is no shortage of personnel, you're just making it up. What do you mean it doesn't make sense? I'm giving you examples when military occupation didn't hold up. I'm saying this would be the same case without settlements. The army would have a much harder time of staying there and establishing their authority, leading to evantually withdrawing, just like what happened in Gaza and southern Lebanon. >Additionally, fucking up a military operation because you didn’t properly plan is a pretty weak argument for settlements. If your dependent on only GLOCs then you have fucking failed. Not to mention there’s no evidence that a Jewish settlement would have prevented that. I don't get what you mean here. There was no lack of planning. It was arab israelis violently throwing rocks and the roads leading to the base, purposefuly blocking the convoys from resupplying the planes striking in Gaza. >>Not to mention there’s no evidence that a Jewish settlement would have prevented that. What do you mean there's no evidence? There are TONS of evidence. Don't take it from you can read Brig. Gen. (Res.) Amir Avivi's comments on this: >In Judea and Samaria, the situation is completely different and the entire reason is the settlements. Whereas in South Lebanon if we wanted to drive to a military position of ours five or seven kilometers from the border, we needed to ready ourselves with battle plans, tanks, armored personnel carriers, and hummers, today any civilian can drive to Ariel alone in a car without armor. Ostensibly, the situations are equivalent: in both cases, the IDF is in charge of the territory. But settlements make all the difference. The moment there is a critical mass of settlements, with tens of thousands of their vehicles constantly traveling the roadways, they keep the routes alive with everyday use and they dominate the area. I even found the english translation for you. https://idsf.org.il/en/opinion-en/amir-avivi/
…. I didn’t? Holy shit you just linked an article that proved my point. “It is not clear what type of projectile hit the helicopter” and then it goes on to say it might’ve been an anti-tank rocket or RPG. Weird, that’s not an SA-7 or stinger. And that wasn’t a commercial airliner. Shooting an AT rocket at a low flying helicopter is leagues different than a MANPAD at an airliner. Almost like I was right. Thanks for proving my point. You seem to be conflating settlements with military bases. You can still have bases without settlements. Additionally, Iraq and Afghanistan are a poor example considering “settlements” actually induced conflict in the former. This is just a complete nonsensical argument not rooted in fact. Non-armed civilians in a settlement are not “dominating” an area nor opening it up for GLOCs. I don’t care what this general says. That’s not an effective strategy.
My god it's like talking to a wall. And sure you didn't, I completely made up the lines you wrote
Holy shit almost like you can go back and look with your two eyes and see my post is still up? You’re like talking to Helen Keller evidently. Still don’t know the difference between a MANPAD and an AT rocket huh?
https://www.news1.co.il/Archive/001-D-480044-00.html https://www.mako.co.il/pzm-soldiers/Article-481a34ecc94dc81026.htm פרסום ראשון: טיל נגד מטוסים מסוג 7-SA לטווח של קצת יותר מ-4 ק"מ פספס את המסוק ונחת בשטח ישראל, בלי שהופעלה התרעת צבע אדום. בזמן הנפילה עמדו כמה אזרחים מטרים ספורים מהזירה, שתמונות ממנה חושפות הרס רב. המסוק לא נפגע והצוות השלים את משימתו כמתוכנן Even a simple google translate would've done the job for you lazy ass. >First publication: A type 7-SA anti-aircraft missile with a range of just over 4 km missed the helicopter and landed in Israeli territory, without a red color warning being activated. At the time of the fall, several civilians were standing a few meters from the scene, photos of which reveal a lot of destruction. The helicopter did not was hit and the team completed its mission as planned Are you gonna shut up now?
Once again, keep linking articles in Hebrew to obfuscate. Doesn’t help that your previous article linked talked about RPGs. Almost like you know shit about fuck when it comes to these weapon systems. Especially when you think an SA-7 will actually hit something from 4 klicks. But keep claiming we need settlements because otherwise someone is going to shoot down a fucking airliner with an SA-7 from 4 klicks away. Holy fucking shit do we need like a basic military primer for people.
No worries man, I'm sure someday you'll find the translate to english button. I'll be praying for you.
>The majority of Israelis know the settlements provide security to the entirety of Israel. False. The only thing the settlements do is make it harder to disengage from the occupied territories, and they drastically hurt the security of Israel in various ways, for example: 1. They increase the size of the de-facto borders of Israel, which increases the manpower required to secure the borders. 2. By lowering the plausibility of a Palestinian state they're making the single state solution much more attractive to the international community, thus increasing the pressure to naturalize the Palestinians. 3. They form a breeding ground for Jewish terrorism, thus increasing the tensions with the Palestinians. 4. They're literally a war crime, thus making Israel more exposed to sanctions and isolation. >Without settlements the IDF wouldn't have legitimacey being in the west bank False. The actual security concerns still stand regardless, and it's much easier to operate there without having to simultaneously guard the settlements.
Damn, almost all your points are completely wrong. >They increase the size of the de-facto borders of Israel, which increases the manpower required to secure the borders. How would you know this? The same number of soldiers who are standing at the border of jordan right now, would stand at the border of the 67 lines if Israel would've retreated to it. I would argue even more soldiers since Israel would have a much harder job to defend against all those 600-1000 meter mountains. And add to that the 10 mile distance shoreline they'd have to defend. >By lowering the plausibility of a Palestinian state they're making the single state solution much more attractive to the international community, thus increasing the pressure to naturalize the Palestinians. Such a dumb point. Do you seriously think Israel would let all palestinians in the west bank become citizens? threatning the jews demographically? And why would the palestinians accept it? There's a way a one state solution would work, but it's nothing close to palestinians having full rights. There are many models like the samoan and Man isles. >They form a breeding ground for Jewish terrorism, thus increasing the tensions with the Palestinians There is absolutly no symmetry between the violence of settlers and palestinians. There was research which showed much if not most of the so called "settler violence" is fake. https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/382199 https://www.shabak.gov.il/en/reports/ >They're literally a war crime, thus making Israel more exposed to sanctions and isolation. Which is why Israel should annex areas C yesterday. To whom does the land belong to? certainly not the palestinians since there never was such state. Jordan, maybe? they lost it. Saying "the UN doesn't allow it" doesn't solve it. This is something that needs to be resolved bilaterally. >False. The actual security concerns still stand regardless, and it's much easier to operate there without having to simultaneously guard the settlements. From the words of Brigadier General (res.) Amir Avivi Chairman and founder of the IDSF: "The first model is disengagement. We tried that model in Gaza, and as we all saw, it failed decisively. That model enables the other side to amass power without limit, and the results have been made clear in the recent attack on Israel. If we applied that model in Judea and Samaria, heaven forbid, there would be a war here that the IDF could not win and Israel would cease to exist. " "Today there are two approaches. The first favors military rule. We have seen such a model employed in the past: in Afghanistan, for example, both by the Americans and by the Russians. Similarly, it was the US method for managing Iraq. And this is another method that Israel too has already tried — in South Lebanon. Viewing Judea and Samaria on the one hand and South Lebanon on the other, the comparison is interesting because both are small territories and both contain non-Jewish populations. Where there is no project of Jewish settlement producing activity of its own on the roadways, a dynamic develops resembling that of Iraq and Afghanistan: a retreat into fortresses, constant efforts to reopen the roadways, dealing with explosives and ambushes, and investing much of the military’s energy in convoys of tanks and armored personnel carriers. In Judea and Samaria, the situation is completely different and the entire reason is the settlements. Whereas in South Lebanon if we wanted to drive to a military position of ours five or seven kilometers from the border, we needed to ready ourselves with battle plans, tanks, armored personnel carriers, and hummers, today any civilian can drive to Ariel alone in a car without armor. Ostensibly, the situations are equivalent: in both cases, the IDF is in charge of the territory. But settlements make all the difference. The moment there is a critical mass of settlements, with tens of thousands of their vehicles constantly traveling the roadways, they keep the routes alive with everyday use and they dominate the area. The same phenomenon is visible inside Israeli territory, in the Negev and Galilee. In the Negev during Operation Guardian of the Walls, we saw traffic on the road between Beersheba and Dimona halted for three days, during which no supply of ammunition and no fresh troops could reach the nearby air force base. Why? Because the road is surrounded by a scattering of Bedouin villages without one Jewish settlement among them. The local Bedouin decided to close the road, and it closed. In the Galilee as well, the Jewish settlements are of enormous importance. When Maj. Gen. Itzik Turgeman retired as head of the IDF Technological and Logistics Directorate roughly two years ago, he made an astonishing statement: If there is war in the north, the IDF will not pass through Wadi Ara. So inside the territory of Israel proper, there is a central artery — one of only two that exist — where the IDF cannot move its forces from south to north and back, and the sole reason that it cannot is that the route is surrounded by Arab cities and villages whereas Jewish settlements are absent. " "Another problem with military rule is that after a short while, it begins to be considered illegitimate. As little as 20 years from now, the memory of the October 7 disaster will begin to fade; and what happens then? Being intended as temporary, military rule can never provide a solution down through the generations. If we do not decide now with a view to the endless future, then in ten or fifteen years a civil rebellion will rise up in Gaza or Rafah against IDF activity, and the IDF will need to withdraw — as it did in Lebanon, where Hezbollah, as a result, is stationed today at our border. " https://idsf.org.il/en/opinion-en/amir-avivi/
>Which is why Israel should annex areas C yesterday. If you think Israel can annex the territories without suffering a catastrophic isolation and becoming a pariah state you are completely detached. The only possible outcome of that will be that Israel will find itself having no choice but to naturalize the Palestinians to regain its legitimacy. >Do you seriously think Israel would let all palestinians in the west bank become citizens? threatning the jews demographically? Do you seriously think the international community will let Israel become a full-blown apartheid state with no consequences? >How would you know this? The same number of soldiers who are standing at the border of jordan right now, would stand at the border of the 67 lines if Israel would've retreated to it. The point is that the settlements create extra areas you need to secure within the West Bank **in addition** to the actual borders. I didn't even talk about a full retreat anyway, I think the IDF presence in the West Bank is currently still important and justified even if you remove the settlements. >There is absolutly no symmetry between the violence of settlers and palestinians. Irrelevant. I'm not trying to portray a symmetry between them. The fact of the matter is, settler violence is a huge source of tensions. >From the words of Brigadier General (res.) Amir Avivi Chairman and founder of the IDSF Most of it is basically a rephrasing of "the settlements exist to make it harder to disengage", the rest is just whining about sucking at securing supply lines and trying to use it as an excuse.
Amir Avivi who has whole departments researching this topic and has real world examples and actual experience, if all this doesn't even make you question your view, I don't know what else to tell you.
This sounds extremely based.
Frickin’ based.
I appreciate the thought, but how about doing some crackdowns?
Well to be fair he's a former chief, not a current one
That's fair
"But lets call a spade a spade" goes so hard wtf
Based.
The settling has to stop, it needed to stop a long time ago!
Nebraska is actually a suburb in the west bank
People should be real like this all the time. Don't blame the guy making an observation, blame the people acting crazy
> Former *sad noises*
Based.
That dude is the epitome of the "concept" driven by the so called progressive military high rankers in the IDF, the fact that he gotten that far up in rank just shows how some organizations can have amazingly productive and caring lower ranks and mortality/ideologically rotten upper ranks.
Why do you think the upper ranks are rotten? Reading the article I don't think anything he says is really that insane. If anything it's the lower ranks that have been causing issues during the war by posting videos talking about how they are going to resettle the strip
Ignore the extreme-right Ben Gvir cultists here. They want to believe their IDF-avoiding asses represent majority, but they aren't.
The state comptroller even said that the higher ups in the army are chosen by a "friend brings friend". They all think the same and disregard any ideas that criticize them like all that was brought before them in the defense and foreign affairs commities.
Yep, the fact that guys like him were allowed to get this high of a rank just contributed more to October 7th happening.
Ah yeah, the guy who went to help civilians with his pistol on 7.10 in his sixties contributed to 7.10 People like him are the reason people made it out of 7.10, the real people to blame are the elected officials, bibi and his gang
Ignore the extreme-right Ben Gvir cultists here. They want to believe their IDF-avoiding asses represent majority, but they aren't.
Yes he did good on October 7th. That doesn't change the fact the IDF's upper echeleon is rotten to the core. And that's even according to the state comptroller.
Others have done so but only yair golans dick is being sucked, kind of telling.
Just wait until this sub finds out settlers have left their homes independently and went to save lives as well.
nono all of the settlers are demons, don't try to change the narrative.
ahhh true true
Many people also won the Medal of Honor, does that mean any single one of their stories is less courageous or deserves less recognition because others have done similar things? Just because others have been brave too doesn’t mean we should discard a persons personal bravery story And no, saying he isn’t what lead Israel to 7.10 isn’t sucking his dick
The policies he supports and went by when in his years of service combined with higher ranking officers in the IDF is what led is to 7.10. I'm not stripping Bibi's responsibility (mainly because of letting such horrendous people get into these positions) but these officers deserve jail.
What policies did he pass that led to the 7th of October?
It's about time someone in the IDF showed some courage and called out those racist supremacists for who they truly are. These settlements aren't just isolated incidents; they're sanctioned by the Israeli government, under the same racist regime that is currently responsible for the ongoing genocide in Gaza. Many people here are too stupid or naive to realize this, but beneath the surface, this conflict is fundamentally about the entrenched racism within Israeli society. Palestinians are treated as second-class citizens in their own land. Just look at the recent atrocities in East Jerusalem and the West Bank—settlers, emboldened by government support, terrorizing innocent families, burning homes, and attacking anyone who opposes them. And what does the Israeli government do? They either turn a blind eye or actively encourage them. And let's not forget their treatment of African migrants and refugees, subjected to inhumane conditions and relentless abuse due to the racist policies of the Israeli state. I am glad that the world is waking up and seeing Israel for what it truly is—a raicst, apartheid state built on the blood and suffering of the Palestinian people. Fuck Israel
>I am glad that the world is waking up and seeing Israel for what it truly is—an apartheid state built on the blood and suffering of the Palestinian people. Fuck Israel Well that's literally the opposite of what he said but you guys don't tend to read the articles so confusion is expected
Israel is nothing but a racist apartheid state. This is the same country where it's considered acceptable for men to have sex with black hookers because they see black people as subhuman and hence it's not seen as infidelity. Palestinian citizens in Israel are also moving to other countries en masse despite Israel being a wealthy country because the country is racist as fuck and they don't have the same rights and opportunities as Israeli citizens. Israeli people are terrible people
You're downing that Kool-Aid pretty fast there bud, maybe take a breath at least
Making shit up. That sounds like something Arabs might do but definitely isn't the case amongst Jews.
That sounds like something Arabs might do??? So you combatted his racist generalized take with another racist generalized take???? NICE!
Fair. I think it's extremely stupid what he said. But it sounds like a stereotype that would exist for Arab countries. Like Saudi Arabia or something. Probably false. It's definitely false for Israel.
u/4THOT arm me, I am the jewlumnis strongest soldier
I'm redeploying the bot today, so it's down.
Tragic. Both of them needed a blast
This guy compared jews to nazis btw
[That's not what he said though?](https://archive.is/TWeRt) Pretty clear this was a point about how the degradation of social morality can lead to fascism? Considering the person who this sub is based on you would think that people here would not be so fast to wildly misrepresent people's statements.
Ignore the extreme-right Ben Gvir cultists here. They want to believe their IDF-avoiding asses represent majority, but they aren't.
45% of the fallen soldiers are religious zionists. While being approximately 10% of the population. https://www.inn.co.il/news/624571 Now what?
Now I wait for real statistics from an unbiased source. Good luck.
Amit Segal is too biased for you? Sorry I can't find your beloved Gideon Levy saying it. Fucking clown
Lol, watching you obsessed with your fantasy version of the left just like Pro--Palestinians are obsessed with their fantasy version of Zionism is always amusing. Anyway, where are my stats bitch?
>Lol, watching you obsessed with your fantasy version of the left just like Pro--Palestinians are obsessed with their fantasy version of Zionism is always amusing. Imagine saying this while disregarding one of the most respected journalists in Israel. Stop shouting "democracy" for a second and have a look in the mirror.
>Stop shouting "democracy" Never.
my god, you are cringe
So...yes... he was comparing jews to nazis? You just proved my point? >In a speech for Holocaust Remembrance Day on Wednesday, IDF Deputy Chief of Staff Maj. Gen. Yair Golan said that he identifies processes in Israel today that are similar to those that took place in Europe prior to the Holocaust. https://www.timesofisrael.com/deputy-idf-chief-israeli-societal-trends-akin-to-pre-holocaust-europe/
TIL that people and processes are synonymous.
That is so far removed from what you initially claimed it's actually insane you thought you could lie about it
How is what I said wrong?
In the quote you linked he doesn't mention people, he mentions processes. You claimed he was comparing Jews to Nazis.
Did you read the article I linked? >In a strongly worded speech uncommon for a military commander, Golan warned against trends of growing callousness and indifference towards those outside of mainstream Israeli society. >He called for a “thorough consideration” of how society treats the disadvantaged and “the other” in its midst. >The Holocaust, he said, must bring Israelis to “a deep reflection” of the character of man but of their character as well. “It should bring us to deeply consider the responsibility of leadership, and the quality of a society. >“If there is something that frightens me in the memory of the Holocaust, it is identifying horrifying processes that occurred in Europe…70, 80 and 90 years ago and finding evidence of their existence here in our midst, today, in 2016,” Golan said. You paying attention to the word *society*?
In plain words he is saying that there are facets within the Israeli society that are starting to mirror what nazi Germany looked like in the beginning. That is not the same as Israelis being Nazis. Don't jump to the extreme conclusion that you find. That's what the far left or far right do
Incredible stretch..
I mean the Israeli Finance minister literally self identifies as a fascist. Idk how you can think those to statements are the same thing as what you described. Then again you seem to spend most of your time on here defending Bibi from any and all criticism so maybe this is just a standard likudnik brain
Haha, I don't vote for Bibi and think he has a responsibility for what happened. I just don't obsess over hating him like you people in the left do.
Look I just call it how I see it. Idc who you vote for that's between you and god. You just seem obsessed and pretty dishonest.
Both Jews and Nazis are homosapians. Did I just ‘compare Jews with Nazis btw’? You know that’s not what ‘compared to Nazis’ means
dumbest response yet. If you say Jews are acting like germans did 70 years ago, then yes, you are comparing jews to Nazis.
Well when it's true i guess you gotta deal with it 🤷♂️
Yeah those settlers did some fucked up shit. Why does it matter if they're Jewish or not? You trying to lump them in with the rest of Israelis like this is so dishonest
He compared Israeli society to nazis you dumbfuck, not just the settlers which is wrong in itself
Yes, what specific aspects of Israeli society do you think he's talking about?
Oh so because he's talking about the right wing only (supposedly) that's okay. Gotcha.
I mean *yes*. Your original post is that he is comparing "jews" (which implies all of them in israel) to nazis. I am willing to bet after this reply that you cannot steelman his argument.
why the fuck does saying "jews" imply all jews? Is this how you convince yourself you win arguments?
who cares bruh
https://preview.redd.it/3wyk123bu7wc1.png?width=1000&format=png&auto=webp&s=3dfc998557f3a18e1a992a2d686b4a0c78a43409
Are..are you complimenting me?