Former Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon, when asked to explain the apparent about-face that led him to advocate the unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, quoted a beloved Israeli pop ballad. “What you can see from there, you can’t see from here,” he said, referring to the shift in perspective he had supposedly undergone since coming to power.

Israeli-born Holocaust historian Omer Bartov invoked the same line when he was asked how he had come to view Israel’s ferocious assault on Gaza as a genocide. Living in the US, where he has spent more than three decades, he said, had given him the necessary distance to see the annihilation of Gaza for what it was. “I think it’s very hard to be dispassionate when you’re there,” he said.

Bartov did more than simply apply the word genocide to Israel’s actions: he shouted it from the establishment-media rooftops, making the case in a lengthy July 2025 essay in the New York Times titled: I’m a Genocide Scholar. I Know It When I See It. (He had addressed some of the arguments in a Guardian essay the year prior.) Bartov’s declaration cost him several close relationships, he told me, even though subsequent events have not only validated his analysis but further demonstrated the lack of concern for Palestinian suffering that has become prevalent in Israeli society.

His new book, Israel: What Went Wrong?, is an attempt to explain that indifference. The book, which was published on Tuesday, is a detailed account of how Israel was transformed from a hopeful nation that in its founding document promised “complete equality of social and political rights to all its citizens irrespective of religion, race or sex” into one intent on what he bluntly terms “settler colonialism and ethno-nationalism”.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 10 points 6 months ago (8 children)

    You've placed the same copy paste blurp multiple times now, and predictably everyone votes you down bectyour idea is just horribly stupid

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (6 children)

    You offer erasure of a people. Nothing more.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago (5 children)

    To the contrary, they could have their own land. I don't think Egypt would give them the land but may allow it as a state within Egypt.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (4 children)

    They do have their own land. Israel has stolen it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (3 children)

    How do you propose to get it from Israel?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (2 children)

    Easy. Stop every red dollar of aid to the country.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

    According to the article, pro-Israel donors influence US politics. So, how would you stop aid to Israel?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    Ban it. In my mind, a country that has drug us to war multiple times, attacked our sailors, blatantly sided with a political party over the nation itself, and uses their online disinformation network to push propaganda against us, they are not an allied country in any sense of the word.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [+] 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (7 children)
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago (4 children)

    Show me where I approved of Israel killing 72,000 Gazans. My proposal would end the Israeli Palestinian conflict with no casualties.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    The way you talk about them not having power to resist. The way you talk about Israel being the winner and not talking about any other alternative but tolerating their evildoing. You are a Zionist, and if you are not, you are a benefit to them with the things you say, so, people shouldn't waste their time with you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    You have to be realistic, otherwise you will just get people killed. Look what Israel did in Gaza.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago (12 children)

    How arrogant. That land isn't ours to give.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago (10 children)

    No, fascist. It's up to Palestine. The country that existed before the 1930s. The country where people of multiple religions, Muslim, Christian and Jewish peacefully lived together until Churchill and the brits decided (under pressure from political groups) to sell land they didn't own to a group with no claim to it.

    It's not up to the people killing civilians, it's not up to Europe, its not up to the US, it is and has always been Palestine.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago (5 children)

    And why is it that they don't have power?

    Is it because a nuclear capable occupation holds them under what can only described as an apartheid system?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago (4 children)

    Not only nuclear capable but Israel is the most powerful country in the Middle East.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (3 children)

    Israel is the size of Vermont. Its only powerful because of bribes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    It's strong because it has a technologically advanced military.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago* (1 child)

    If Israel has demonstrated anything in 80 years of murderous occupation its that religious nut cunts with a few guns doesnt guarantee power, or safety. Human rights and treating people and neighbors with basic respect does. It doesnt matter how strong their military thinks it is, there are always ways around that, and defending any large space takes a lot more troops than they think.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

    "Palestine did not exist before the 1930s"

    1917 In November (October on the Julian calendar), the Bolsheviks seize power and Russia makes preparations to withdraw from the war. That same month, Britain issues the Balfour Declaration. In December, the British Army led by General Allenby marches victoriously into Jerusalem. Palestine is placed under British military occupation (1917–20). It then had a population of 688,957 Arabs (including Christians, Muslims and other non-Jewish minorities) and a population of 58,728 Jews.

    1922 The Council of the League of Nations agrees to the text of the British Mandate of Palestine. The Palestine Order-in-Council of 1 September separates Palestine from the Emirate of Transjordan, which is established to the east of the River Jordan. The Colonial Secretary, Winston Churchill, in a statement on British policy rejects the claim that Palestine was to become ‘as Jewish as England is English’. He declares: ‘His Majesty’s Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view.’ He adds that: ‘the status of all citizens of Palestine in the eye of the law shall be Palestinian, and it has never been intended that they, or any section of them, should possess any other juridical status. In an exchange of correspondence with the Palestine Arab delegation, Churchill recognizes ‘the people of Palestine’, specifically referring to Palestine’s Arab community.

    1948 Civil war breaks out on a wider scale in Palestine. In March, the US concludes that partition is unworkable and reverses its policy. It declares itself in favor of a UN Trusteeship for Palestine in a single unitary state. A UN Trusteeship Agreement is subsequently drafted. The Jewish Agency condemns it, goes on the offensive and avows to proclaim a Hebrew Republic on 16 May. In April, the Haganah (Jewish paramilitary), implements the Plan Dalet. Thirteen military operations follow, eight of which are beyond the boundaries set out for the Arab state in the UN Partition Plan. On 11 April, a massacre is perpetrated by the Irgun with the support of the Haganah in the Palestinian Arab village of Deir Yassin, near Jerusalem. By May, the Zionists have conquered Jaffa (which was supposed to be part of the Arab state as envisaged in the UN Partition Plan) and Haifa, causing their Arab populations to flee to secure ground. At midnight on 14/15 May the last British High Commissioner in Palestine terminates the Mandate and departs Haifa. The Yishuv concomitantly proclaims the establishment of the state of Israel. By this time, over 350,000 Palestinian Arabs have been evicted from their homes. The Arab Legion, commanded by British officers, enters Palestine on the pretext that it is defending the population of Palestine from further attacks by the Haganah and the Irgun (Zionist paramilitary). It is supported by troops from Lebanon, Syria, Egypt and Iraq. The fighting escalates. In July, the Haganah captures Lydda, Ramle and Nazareth expelling its Arab populations. By the time hostilities come to an end some 750,000 Palestinian Arabs and 17,000 Jews are displaced by the fighting. In December, the UN General Assembly passes a resolution providing that: ‘the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago

    This doesn't disprove what I said whatsoever. All this shows is that the term "Palestine" exists, and it does. Palestine has been the colloquial term for the region that roughly covers the Abrahamic religion's holy land since it was coined by the Romans. However, what this does not show is Palestine being an independent sovereign state at any point in history. This region did not have any sort of sovereignty for thousands of years. It was always controlled by external empires. The two modern states are literally the first ones since ancient times to rule the land independently from within. This idea that there was a Palestinian country historically that has always existed before Israel is simply not true. The ethnic cleansing and fighting is real, but Palestine before the modern state was never a country at any point in the past.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago (6 children)

    How about we give the Palestinians their homeland back, and israel can be remade in america, since so many of the settlers have american passports, if we're giving away any random country's land to capitulate to this genocidal state?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 6 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    So you agree that the state of israel is a murderous one, and your solution is to give them the land of the people they murder with impugnity and celebrate the deaths of with champagne?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago (8 children)

    Counter proposal. Israel prosecutes the IDF solders that carried out the Hannibal Directive and killed all those Israeli Jews on Oct 7th to false flag their nation into committing a genocide against a semite population. For 14 months before Oct 7th, there were constant protests in Tel Aviv about Bibi's corruption. It's a bit late to send him to jail over that, but it's long past time to send him to the Hague and at the very least put him in an electeic chair for his crimes against humanity. And much the same way Germany was funding Israel for all the years for the Holocaust, Israel needs to fund the recreation of Palestine, and much the same way Germany wasn't allowed a large military after WW2, Jews, especially those in Israel, can't be allowed to control money for the same time period. Their own, or anybody else's.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (3 children)

    The US also supported Nazi Germany until very late in the game. Germany also had(maybe still do?) reparations to Israel for the Holocaust. There also reparations placed on Germany after WW1(which played a large role in WWII, but seperate story) and one of my main reasoning to put Jews, especially Israeli Jews, on conservatorship, is because of the donor strangehold on America. Saying they won't, is a pretty good indication that it's a good punishment though.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (2 children)

    It is probably illegal in the US to put Jews on conservatorship.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    That's that place that was started a day after m00t met Epstein, right? The place that claimed that there was an elite pedophile ring where they use code words like Cheese Pizza for Child Porn, right? Whatever happened to those kooks and their crazy conspiracies?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (9 children)

    Why Egypt and not Jordan? Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon, and Palestine are exactly the same. They're the same people with the same culture, that were only divided by colonial borders drawn by the French and British. The idea of a Palestinian ethnicity is a new phenomenon, it didn't exist before the 1920s. They're Levantese Arabs. Egyptians are pretty distinct from Levantese Arabs. They have their own cuisine, history, dialect, ideas about religion, and so on. Your proposal doesn't make sense on that front alone.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago (7 children)

    Egypt cannot possibly govern the West Bank, it is too far from the Egyptian heartland and it is also physically separated from the rest of country. Egypt has already tried governing Gaza before and that went horribly wrong.

    Jordan and the West Bank are physically connected and they're the same culturally, therefore it makes sense for them to be together in that sense, but with that being said, Jordan also tried to rule the West Bank before and that went pretty poorly.

    The biggest hurdle here is why would Egypt or Jordan participate? What would they get out of it. They would be getting a big headache in exchange for a lot of strategic land (Egypt giving the Sinai also means giving up one side of the Suez Canal and that's a big no no in geopolitics). Not to mention, that the West Bank already has well over 700,000 settlers. Even if we exclude East Jerusalem, that's still over 500k settlers. That's a loooot of people, and they're also some of most unhinged zealots you'll find anywhere in the world. That's even bigger headache than the Palestinians that they'll have to take on. I just don't see this as a realistic proposal.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago (6 children)

    Egypt would be giving up some up the Sinai not all of it. The US governs Alaska and Hawaii despite not being physically connected. Egypt will get peace at its borders. Also, fighting in Gaza and the West Bank could push Palestinian refugees into Egypt.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (5 children)

    It's not the same. The US has unrestricted air and ocean access to both Alaska and Hawaii, Egypt won't have that. Not to mention, Egypt gains nothing from this deal. The Sinai is more strategically important to them

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (4 children)

    As part of the deal, Egypt could be given permission to access its new land through a specific land corridor. Egypt would gain peace on its borders. Continual fighting between Israel and Palestinian could cause a flood of migrants into Egypt.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (3 children)

    Egypt already has peace with Israel and they're already blocking any potential wave of Palestinian migrants and have been for decades now. Egypt doesn't benefit from such a deal

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    They will have to go somewhere. Under my proposal they will stay in the West Bank, but it will be controlled by Egypt. There will be no humanitarian crisis.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago

    Egypt is not giving up the entire Sinai, only a part of it.

    Israel can build desalination plants. The Sinai being a desert is a selling point because Egypt will does not have the technology to develop it. In exchange for desert, Egypt will be given fertile land.

    It's preferable for Palestinians to live under Egypt than under Israel.

    The Palestinians in the West Bank will stay. The West Bank will be enlarged by land equivalent to Gaza since that will go to Israel. The Palestinians in Gaza will move there.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (6 children)

    No one cares what Israel wants anymore. Why are you catering to murderers? Could it be that you are on their side?

    If someone knocks on your door, panthera, and says they will kill your entire family but they will settle for just eating your little girl, you sound like the type of person to push the girl out the door to them instead of grabbing a weapon and doing whats actually right.

    You have to start with ethics and basic human rights, not triangulation and negotiation with what you think evil will be OK with.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    Why are you catering to murderers

    But Christians, Jews, and Muslims have been murdering each other in the Holy Land for many centuries.

    They're all murderers. What participant has clean hands?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    They’re all murderers.

    Human beings have an innate right to resist oppression and murder once available peaceful avenues have been tried.

    What participant has clean hands?

    One side is committing genocide and massive human rights abuses right now. One side is not.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)