Doesn't necessarily make you oppressed, now does it?

Jewish victims don't matter - got it. Israel has no right to defend itself. — BitconnectCarlos

Sure and in the US we had the right to own slaves and steal land from the native Americans. Might makes right because it is obvious the source of that might is God and His will is being done. When the Jews complete the process and rebuild their temple, Jesus will return and prove all the Jews who have not been worshipping Him wrong.

Interestingly at this time in history, our media in the US is hammering away at the wrongs we have done. We can only wonder when Israel's leadership will see their take over of land and prejudice against those who lived there before Zionism as a wrong that needs to be corrected. A big problem is the Jews and Palestinians educate their children separately, each teaching their children a different explanation of history, and last night I watched a program about people of color homeschooling their children, which can evolve into the problem Israel has of opposing cultures pitted against each other.

Doesn't necessarily make you oppressed, now does it? — Benkei

I would think that being on the receiving end of an unjust sentence qualifies as a form of oppression.

The title of the thread is.....

Israel killing Civilians in Gaza and the West Bank

I wonder if there would be some credible way to calculate how many Palestinians have been killed by Israel since 1948. I have no idea, and also have no idea who might be considered a credible source on the topic.

https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/37-palestinian-children-injured-and-arrested-east-jerusalem

More Israeli terrorist action on children

Over the past two days, 29 Palestinian children were injured in East Jerusalem including in the Old City and the Sheikh Jarrah neighbourhood. Eight Palestinian children were meanwhile arrested. “A one-year old toddler was among those injured. Some children were taken for treatment at hospitals with injuries in the head and the spine. “This comes amid reports that nearly 300 people were injured in the area.“UNICEF received reports that ambulances were restricted from arriving on location to assist and evacuate the injured and that an on-site clinic was reportedly hit and searched.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/04/11/palestine-israeli-police-abusing-detained-children

Israeli security forces are abusing Palestinian children detained in the West Bank. The number of Palestinian children arrested by Israeli forces has more than doubled since October 2015. Interviews with children who have been detained, video footage, and reports from lawyers reveal that Israeli security forces are using unnecessary force in arresting and detaining children, in some cases beating them, and holding them in unsafe and abusive conditions. “Palestinian children are treated in ways that would terrify and traumatize an adult,” said Sari Bashi, Israel and Palestine country director. “Screams, threats, and beatings are no way for the police to treat a child or to get accurate information from them.”

"but but but Hamas!"

and....?

If we apply logic to questions like these - we must ask ourselves if in the last 2000 years - everywhere jews have lived - they always slaughtered others around them?

If they never did that. Why did they suddenly start now if the other part is completely innocent and has not done anything to provoke these actions?

I normally ask myself these questions.

While we're at it, let's empathise with the Nazis. How terribly humiliated they were after WWI, their economy in shambles — Benkei

Care to edit this for accuracy?

Probably not. I think the exercise of empathising with criminals ought to be employed at the stage of sentencing not when adjucating if a crime happened or not. So his invitation to emphatise with the Israeli narrative is as misplaced as it would be here.

who are the criminals?

I meant no Nazis ante about 1920.

sure, Nazis avant la lettre.

While we're at it, let's empathise with the Nazis. How terribly humiliated they were after WWI, their economy in shambles
— Benkei

Care to edit this for accuracy? — tim wood

Hitler's earlier speeches were all about making Germany out to be the victim and it's that narrative plus his oratory skills that catapulted his rise in popularity. Even if this is true - and there's strong reason to believe that the Versailles treaty was overly harsh and unfair - obviously what came after is unjustified.

This isn't about power either - even if the Nazis were effectively powerless they'd still be evil just like any organization that wants to destroy Israel is evil regardless of size or power. They might think they have good intentions or alternative ideas but in practice it is evil and puts a minority at enormous risk. “A people can be a minority somewhere only if they are a majority elsewhere" - Arendt.

The left repeatedly says that victims essentially get blank checks to deal with their oppressors but somehow you don't see the left defending Nazis burning French villages (why not? The French had a role in Versailles. Or maybe American towns would have been a better target with the prominent role Wilson played at Versailles.) None of it makes any sense to me - they say the Germans had "agency" but the Palestinians don't. I give up trying to understand. When does one truly make the transition from victim to oppressor? I've never heard that question sufficiently addressed and it probably can't be.

If we apply logic to questions like these - we must ask ourselves if in the last 2000 years - everywhere jews have lived - they always slaughtered others around them? — Iris0

Ha, what an excellent question. Yes, what is the historical record? Examining that record doesn't automatically settle any controversy about the current situation in the Middle East, but it's surely relevant. It would for example be considered relevant in a court of law. Examining such an extensive record does help shine some light on intent.

As for current history in our lifetimes, we can examine Jews in the United States who are present in numbers similar to Israel. It should be clear from the evidence that Jews have never been any kind of problem in this country. Again, this speaks to intent. If the Jews were warlike people intent on theft and oppression etc, why are they not engaging in such activities anywhere else?

The only complaint I can offer in response to the post of Iris0, is that this thread is not about logic, and thus logical calculations such as Iris0 was engaged in would be..... Yes, you guessed it. Off topic.

Even if this is true - and there's strong reason to believe that the Versailles treaty was overly harsh and unfair — BitconnectCarlos

On the other hand, just to argue a point, if the WWI allies had invaded Germany and taken it over, then WWII would not have happened. That is, maybe there should be a harsh response to those who start horror shows like WWI?

Yeah, had Germany been dismantled after WWI there would have likely been no WWII. Russia, if my memory serves me right, advocated for dismantling Germany but the other countries didn't want that and Versailles ended up in an unhappy compromise where Germany was left severely weakened, but not destroyed.

I give up trying to understand. — BitconnectCarlos

Ah, you're finally starting to get it. The notion that any of this can understood is based on an assumption that there is a logical framework to such ideas which can be analyzed and made more clear. If there is no logical framework, if such ideas are powered by emotion and not reason, then trying to understand the ideas is a fool's errand.

Russia, if my memory serves me right, advocated for dismantling Germany but the other countries didn't want that and Versailles ended up in an unhappy compromise where Germany was left severely weakened, but not destroyed. — BitconnectCarlos

Ah, thank you. I didn't know the part about Russia, that was educational.

My understanding is that in the twenties Germany was recovering from the Treaty and thus interest in radical politicians was waning, posing an existential threat to Hitler's career. What turned that around was the market crash of 1929. This is surely another topic, but in a word, we are still running the very same risk today as we continue to let high stakes game players run wild on Wall Street. We just never learn, do we?

The ethnic cleansing continues apace:

https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20210609-1500-palestinian-home-face-demolition-in-jerusalems-silwan/

The Israeli-run Jerusalem Municipality on Monday issued demolition orders to dozens of Palestinian families of Al-Bustan suburb in occupied East Jerusalem's Silwan neighbourhood.

The demolition notice stated: "We wanted to inform you that we will carry out the demolition according to the court's decision. To minimise damages, you must leave the home without people and items until 21 days after receiving this letter. The municipality is not responsible for property damage if the house is not evacuated as mentioned."

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jun/24/amnesty-catalogue-of-violations-by-israeli-police-against-palestinians

Since this topic has been revived I'd be interested in hearing out the case -- as has been claimed earlier (or strongly implied) -- that Arendt would be okay with Hamas deliberately murdering Israeli civilians. Do we have any views from Arendt from after the '67 war on the "occupation?" She was fervently in support of Israel during the '67 war and also obviously supporting Israel in '73 so I'd like to see the case that she condones civilian murder made.

It's so hard for me to imagine a Jewish woman of that age, from that background, supporting the murder of Jewish civilians. I tried to find evidence of it but I couldn't. It would make her such an anomaly among that generation.

Bonus question: For those supporting the "by any means necessary" approach would rape be acceptable if it was found to be effective for attaining political means?

Who argued that? Probably a misrepresentation. She did sign this letter in 1948. https://archive.org/details/AlbertEinsteinLetterToTheNewYorkTimes.December41948

Yeah, it's fine for other thinkers to have ideas on the government of Israel and to criticize political parties -- I don't care about that. We can all criticize, but the moment it becomes so venomous that it excuses violence against Israel's own citizens is when that thinker has gone too far. That's always been the major dividing line for me.

EDIT: It was 180 who cited Arendt.

Nice. :shade:

Israel's Einsatzgruppen is automating their apatheid gulag.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/israel-is-sending-robots-with-machine-guns-to-the-gaza-border

I wonder what TPF's resident Isreal Occupation-Apartheid-Ethnic Cleasing apologists makes of this brief video about the Palestinian Authority collaborating with Israel while also repressing the Palestinian people.

https://youtu.be/5myHwY654yY

The PA is obviously shitty, but Hamas is even worse on human rights. But yes, everyone oppresses the Palestinian people.

Given that the apartheid-ethnic cleasing State of Israel is the pre-90s South Africa or Rhodesia of the Middle East, the BDS movement has long been as appropriate as the SA Divestment movements were in the 1980s (in which I'd participated). Anyway, maybe this gesture is insignicant, or maybe not. We'll see. Better late than never. :up:

https://apnews.com/article/ben-and-jerrys-ice-cream-palestinian-territories-d8488b4c9c19dac11e2c253530d63014

And the framing by Israel is telling as usual: “a surrender to ongoing and aggressive pressure from extreme anti-Israel groups”

Being against oppression is an extreme position and anti-Israeli. So being pro-Israeli means being for oppression then? Ok. Glad we cleared that up.

The PA is obviously shitty, but Hamas is even worse on human rights. But yes, everyone oppresses the Palestinian people. — BitconnectCarlos

You keep saying that but Israel is worst on human rights from the three entities now named. Both in numbers and types of abuses. So you keep defending Israel despite it being worse than Hamas, the latter which you apparently find horrendously evil and bad since it's your go-to scapegoat.