top 100 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 123 points 1 year ago (44 children)

It would be great if they all just recognized Palestine as a country and cut all trade with Israel immediately until they stopped. Instead of a symbolic walk out, actually walk out of their lives... And you can verify if they cut their shit out

  • source
  • hideshow 44 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    israel and the united states would leave the UN if they did this

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (38 children)
  • [–] 56 points 1 year ago (37 children)

    Because there need to be reasons to participate in society properly. If it’s “we’re cutting you off from all trade and never restarting it,” there’s no incentive for them to change their behavior. Sanctions always give a reason.

    Punishment isn’t a good motivator of human behavior, reinforcement is.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 37 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    The starving peasant, outside the class system is the first among the exploited to discover that only violence pays. For him there is no compromise, no possible coming to terms; colonization and decolonization is simply a question of relative strength.

    • Frantz Fanon, The Wretched of the Earth

    For the starving people of Gaza, who have lived their entire lives in what amounts to the world's largest concentration camp, the time for "changed behaviour" from Israel is long passed, if it was ever there to begin with.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Well clearly their form of fighting against Israel is going well for them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

    Great, we can keep being perpetually blood feuding with eachother for all eternity, great solution, once we've exiled and eradicated all hateful people the remainder will live in peace and prosperity forever.

    (It's not like that thinking isn't basically how we got here or anything)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago

    Great, we can keep being perpetually blood feuding with eachother for all eternity, great solution, once we've exiled and eradicated all hateful people the remainder will live in peace and prosperity forever.

    This is not Fanon's point, nor is it mine. The Wretched of The Earth Is a seminal text on colonialism for good reason. In it, Fanon is grappling with what it means for the colonized to violently resist.

    The settler state is already violent. We just don't usually conceive of state violence as such. Fanon is correct in the same way that the way to deal with a schoolyard bully is to stand up and confront him. Not appeal to his better angels.

    (It's not like that thinking isn't basically how we got here or anything)

    This misunderstands the situation. This isn't some ancient conflict where both sides are equivalent. The Israeli state is the aggressor here, and that aggression has a clear beginning, with at least the Nakbah.

    The land itself is the thing being fought over. Not some nebulous blood feud. The land, the capacity to live on it, work on it, cultivate it, to have history on that land. These are things being denied to the native Palestinians by the Israeli state.

    The solution here is the right of return for all displaced Palestinians, restoration of their civil liberties, language rights, etc. So they might be able govern themselves, as they see fit.

    For a colonized people the most essential value, because it is the most concrete, is first and foremost the land: the land which will bring them bread and, above all, dignity -The Wretched of The Earth

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    What we are asking for is not violence, what we are asking for is a free Palestine for all its citizens, regardless of religion. We want the religious ethno-supremacist state built on our stolen land to become free.

    We aren't asking for blood, and we aren't asking to exile or eradicate anyone.

    (It's not like that thinking isn't basically how we got here or anything)

    You're blaming two years of genocide on a single act of violent resistance. How we got here is 500 of our villages destroyed, many massacres against our people, 700 thousand of us expelled from our ancestral homelands, and 77 years of oppression and shooting our kids while calling us animals and snakes.

    History will reflect October 7 as the Gaza ghetto uprising that it was, violent resistance to 75 years of dehumanizing us and colonizing our land, and 16 years of military siege on our people in Gaza.

    Imagine telling Jews in WW2 they should have died peacefully because resisting violently is how we got here.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (28 children)

    Israel should not be coming back, it needs to be replaced by a country representing the indigenous land owners and not European colonisers.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 28 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    What happens to the people living in Israel currently?

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

    Some Israelis are living in the land of their grandfathers but most of them have countries of origin they can be returned to. If that would be bad for them, there's always countries they can emigrate to. But most solutions that aren't zionist or "two state" are along the lines of "abolish the ethnostate and replace it with a real democracy" in which case the people currently living in Israel (minus those guilty of crimes against humanity) largely go about their lives as they did before.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (20 children)

    Jews believe they are the indigenous land owners. That's what this whole thing is about.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (19 children)

    Yes and POTUS believes that Tylenol causes Autism. Just because leaders believe something doesn't make it true.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [+] -12 points 1 year ago (18 children)

    So you don't believe Jews used to inhabit Israel, despite the evidence? They do have a valid reason for making a claim to the land, which is entirely different from your example

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    When your ancestors lives in another continent for centuries you lose your connection and can't have any claim or force a state on the local population . The ancestry argument is very stupid

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago* (15 children)

    No I believe that they were originally from that spot between Egypt and Israel until they moved to Egypt and then to Israel after they committed genocide and killing the people that lived there before them. Then they got booted out of Israel and lived other places. They have less claim to the land than the people that were there in the 1800s. Have you not read the Bible?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 1 year ago (14 children)

    Given that answer, and that Palestinians don't currently live in the bits of the region that Israel occupies (whether legally or illegally) it seems you understand that if you leave a place you don't have an eternal right to move back there, but that nevertheless for some length of time you retain such a claim.

    I think that's the key to understanding why it can get a bit complicated...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    It is only complicated because of after ww2 the allies decided to carve up land that they did not own and did not ask the people who lived there where boarders should be. They also kicked out those that lived in Palestine and gave it to people who had not lived there in over 400 years. When outsiders who don't live in an area make decisions for those that do shit goes wrong.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    People say this all the time but this is not the reason it's complicated. There were already hundreds of thousands of Jews living in the region by that point - Zionist migration to Palestine started in the 19th century, and that had been the cause of tensions for decades already. Hundreds of thousands more wanted to leave the Europe that had just tried to murder them again. If the Allies had just decided to bugger off and leave them to it the result would have been far from peaceful. As it was, they tried to achieve a compromise through the UN. They failed at that task but not because they "decided to carve up land." Britain in particular refused to implement the partition plan recommended by the UN special committee because it was not acceptable to the Arabs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    In 1947 jews made up 32% of the population in Palestine 630,000 out of 1,970,000. In 1948 jews made up 82% 716,700 out of 872,700. Somebody must have moved over a million people out of Palestine to make Israel. Forcibly removing people that had lived there since it was owned by the Ottoman Empire would make them angry and wanting their land back.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Zionism among jews who never left Palestine was not popular, Israel couldn't exists with only the local jews alone. European jews who lost the connection to the land had are the reason why Israel was created and had zero right to the land

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    So do you think that now, in 2025, Jewish families who moved to Palestine in 1925 have no right to be there?

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

    I never said that. I said the Zionist foreigners back then has no right to impose a state on the local population . Their descendent can't be displaced because they where born in Israel

    It's like saying that European settlers in America had no right to take control on most of the land back in the 15 centuries is a call to expel all current Americans back to Europe

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    It's a bit different when you're forcibly removed from your home, no?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Yes, but I think that supports restarting from the 1940s, not from the 1700s. By 1947 there were hundreds of thousands of Jews living in the territory that now forms Israel and Palestine.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    They were moved there by European colonialists who didn't give a shit about the natives who already lived there.

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

    "Moved there by European colonialists"? Which colonialists were these who were picking up European Jews and dropping them off in Palestine?

    Jews mostly moved there due to getting sick of being repeatedly pogromed in Europe. So if by "moved there by" you mean "repeatedly forced out by" then kinda.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    This isn't ancient history, this is so within our memorable lifetime. Palestinians were slaughtered and forced out within living memory and a lot of them are still alive and have the keys to they're stolen homes.

    Jacob from New York does not have the same claim to the land his ancestors occupied thousands of years ago, as the Palestinian who built the literal house he stole after living on the land occupied by her ancestors for all recorded history.

    It's not complicated at all.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -8 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Sounds like you want revenge colonialism.

    It's nice to see that you and Israel can agree on the desirability of a forever war and ethnic cleansing...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    We want a one state solution because thanks to Israel fault of building illegal settlements a two state solution is no longer possible . Nobody advocate for kicking out all Israeli from the land

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    A two state solution is still possible. Israel kicked all the settlers out of Gaza once, and it can be done with other settlements too. It's only infeasible because no country that matters is willing to stand up to Netanyahu in a way that matters. But without doing that, there's also no way to enact whatever counter-genocide it is you're advocating.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago*

    There was only 9000 settlers in Gaza. Here we are talking about 700k . Israel will probably do the same with Arabs and will be transferred to the new state which will be in a such economical weakness .

     counter-genocide it is you're advocating.

    I said i advocate for a white state solution with equal rights so nobody is going to be genocide or ethnically cleansing stop being disingenuous

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 236 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Like... some sort of Final Solution, you say?

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago*

    i know right!

    just in time, phew

    this is the peace plan, i know it in my soul, i was reading km this morning, oh it was so good, it just said hamas will make peace to me over and over and over again

    yay

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 100 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Apparently, Israel hacked phones in Gaza to blast out Netanyahu's speech as he was giving it. If that had happened in the Superman movie, the audience would have said that's a bit too comic book villainous.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 41 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    That's some straight up Joker shenanigans.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Id say that's more red skull or scarecrow personally, Joker generally only cares about it for folks who are in on the joke IE have context.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 168 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    It would be great if they would all walk out on Trump too.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 58 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    Half of them probably fell asleep about 20 minutes into his insane rant

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 33 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Twenty minutes is about how long a normal person can be reasonably expected maintain attention, even if the content is interesting. That's why TED talks are 20 minutes long.

    On the other hand, Trump's rants are mind numbing. You're either seriously trained at listening, or you have something wrong with your brain, if you can listen to him for more than 2 minutes without zoning out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I can’t even listen to him for 10 seconds without becoming irrationally angry.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 81 points 1 year ago

    He's a war criminal. He's lucky that's all they did

  • source
  • [–] 53 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Imagine a world where the US respected the International Criminal Court and this man was arrested the minute he set foot on American soil.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Ok, so hear me out. The ICC is a UN body. The UN headquarters is international soil. Why couldn't the UN security services arrest him and send him to stand trial at the ICC?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Because of this the American Service Members Protection Act

    The act gives the president power to use "all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any U.S. or allied personnel being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court.

    This authorization led to the act being nicknamed "The Hague Invasion Act", since the act would allow the president to order military action in The Hague, the seat of the ICC, to prevent American or allied officials and military personnel from being prosecuted or detained by the ICC.

    The subsection (b) specifies this authority shall extend to "Covered United States persons" (members of the ("Armed Forces of the United States"), elected or appointed officials of the United States Government, and other persons employed by or working on behalf of the United States Government) and "Covered allied persons" (military personnel, elected or appointed officials, and other persons employed by or working on behalf of the government of a NATO member country, a major non-NATO ally including Australia, Egypt, Israel, Japan, Argentina, the Republic of Korea, and New Zealand).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 72 points 1 year ago

    "Just let me finish up this genocide really quick, please guys..."

  • source
  • [–] 28 points 1 year ago*

    By contrast the wanted war criminal Benjamin Netanyahu received over FIFTY standing ovations when he addressed the US Congress last year.

  • source
  • [–] 24 points 1 year ago

    Finish its final solution. He should have been rotting in prison a long time ago

  • source
  • [–] 45 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Really wish the UN had some kind of method to stop counties from clearly and openly committing genocide

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 51 points 1 year ago

    It's called war, but it's not very popular, especially when waged with no economic incentives. Just look at how many Europeans complain about sending help to Ukraine, not even troops.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 38 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    Not arrest. Not put on trial. Not disarm.

    Walkout…

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    US has veto power. There is no possible way for the UN to do anything.

    The UN is flawed by design.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    Russia has veto it vote against any resolution about Ukraine. European countries still provide billions in aid and arms to Ukraine to defend itself . The genocide convention is a bigger authority document than UN resolutions

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    Yeah, but at the time the US could have fought every nation on the planet to a standtill and the USSR could have fought every nation on the planet but the US to a standstill, so there was no way to not make them permanent members of the security council with veto power since they could just ignore other countries if they wanted.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    Yes it is flawed, but it was basically "give the 5 largest powers veto power, or they don't participate". If they don't participate, it would be even more ornamental than it currently is.

    Ideally they would have more power to stop shit like this, but the UN as it stands is better than nothing. They do bring countries together to talk things through that otherwise might not have and have successfully de-escilated issues in the past.

    I'm not saying people shouldn't expect, or push for, better, and I'm not saying this is your view point, but I do see the sentiment that they're useless/do nothing quite often.

    Walking out won't ultimately achieve much... But it's at least better than sitting their and letting him feel validated in his psychopathic plans.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I am not asking for a legal framework to enforce acts of anti-genocide.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    The permanent UNSC members with veto power was a huge mistake. But possibly it was nessecary or these members wouldn't have joined at all and the UN would have been stillborn. The US now has cast more vetoes than the rest of the UNSC permanent members combined

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago

    He's gonna do it and my tax dollars are gonna pay for it.

  • source
  • [–] 44 points 1 year ago

    Cool but have those countries ended trade with Israel? Declared sanctions? Sent military aid to the PLO? Establish a no-fly zone? I'm glad this happened, its a start, but it's not enough and Gaza is running out of time.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago

    The final solution to the Palestinian question?

  • source
  • [–] 28 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Weird times when Ireland's PM is the voice of reason at the UN

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 25 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Tony Blair to rule Gaza for five years. What the fuck is that weird ass fan fiction of reality!? XD

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 32 points 1 year ago

    I'm so sick of all of the performative grandstanding. Grab this fucker and throw him in a deep hole. Nice walkout guys, you really showed him.

  • source
  • [+] -8 points 1 year ago

    Oh wow, some people walked out in an ineffectual symbolic gesture.

  • source
  • [+] -8 points 1 year ago

    What performative wankery. A bunch of them are just sitting down clapping. Did he still speak? Was he arrested?

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›
    10 comments in c/world view that post