Israel vs. Palestine

[OneBrickOneVoice]

What do you think. On one hand Israel opress the poor palestinians with tanks and machine guns, on the otherhand Israel is more liberal than any other state in the middle east. What's your view if you have one.

[WUOrevolt]

Im sure everyone here has an opinion on the Israeli-Palestinian issue. If they don't then they really shoud have one, seeing as how it is one of the most improtant issues in the world today.

I for one support some Palestinian resistance. While I am not a nationalist, I do support the Popular Front for the Liberartion of Palestine. I see their secular Leftist views as excellent, and like the fact that they don't have strict religious codes like many Palestinian resistance groups do. I aslo really like the fact that women are given high positions in the PFLP.

As for Isreal, I do not call for its destruction, the way Hamas and Al Qaeda do. I do believe in the two state solution, that Israel must give up its occupied territories, free all Palestinian prisoners being held in Israeli jails, and allow the refugees their right of return.

[LSD]

Im sure everyone here has an opinion on the Israeli-Palestinian issue. If they don't then they really shoud have one, seeing as how it is one of the most improtant issues in the world today.

Although I do have an opinion on this subject, my biggest objection to the way this issue is handled is precisely the myopic absurdism you just illustrated.

Somebody, seriously, explain to me how the conflict between four million odd Palestinians and seven million odd Israelis is anything approaching the "most important issue in the world today".

Should the occupation end? Should Israel get the fuck out of Palestinian land? Of course. But there are so many worse and more pressing problems in the world today that the undue focus on this one region is only harming the internationalist effort.

Look, obviously if you are Palestinian or live in the area, this is a pressing issue; but for the rest of us, this is a minor situation at most. And the only reason that this "conflict" receives the press it does is because it is a wonderful means by which the rulling class distracts us from the all the other incredibly important shit going on in the world today.

Please understand, I am not saying that we shouldn't recognize the rights of the Palestinians nor the injustice of the Israeli policies; but come on, "one of the most improtant issues in the world today"?

Really??? :blink:

[Body Count]

This issue in Israel is about imperialism, racism, chauvinism, and religion.

I think its a pretty big deal.

[LSD]

This issue in Israel is about imperialism, racism, chauvinism, and religion.

And that's unique to Israel how?

[bayano]

firstly, im sure there are hundreds more threads about this here, and why wasnt a slightly older one resurrected?

but i have partial agreement with LSD. the situation in falasteen/israel is especially problematic compared to many and symbolic of capitalism, racism, and imperialism at large. at the same time, i have always been frustrated about a focus on one region to the point where it causes division if it is or is not included, without equal treatment for other issues. in just about every meeting that it has come up (often by me) i have voted to include it as an issue, but what about colombia, jamaica, haiti, east timor, nepal, chiapas, kurdistan, kashmir..... i mean, there is a point where we need to wonder if our focus is too much on certain issues at the detriment of others.

[Reuben]

Originally posted by [email protected] 5 2006, 05:51 PM
firstly, im sure there are hundreds more threads about this here, and why wasnt a slightly older one resurrected?

but i have partial agreement with LSD. the situation in falasteen/israel is especially problematic compared to many and symbolic of capitalism, racism, and imperialism at large. at the same time, i have always been frustrated about a focus on one region to the point where it causes division if it is or is not included, without equal treatment for other issues. in just about every meeting that it has come up (often by me) i have voted to include it as an issue, but what about colombia, jamaica, haiti, east timor, nepal, chiapas, kurdistan, kashmir..... i mean, there is a point where we need to wonder if our focus is too much on certain issues at the detriment of others.
there is something in this - not that i by any means wish to diminish the suffering of the palestinans or the attention that the situation demands. Is it possible that the focus on Israel and Palestine rather simply reflecting current reality, derives in part from the fact that the great theoroticians - namely Lenin - had things to say against zionism?

[YKTMX]

Originally posted by [email protected] 5 2006, 08:01 AM

This issue in Israel is about imperialism, racism, chauvinism, and religion.

And that's unique to Israel how?
Do you have many other examples of 40 year old military occupations backed by imperialism after a ferocious land-grab?

[Niemand]

As for Isreal, I do not call for its destruction, the way Hamas and Al Qaeda do. I do believe in the two state solution, that Israel must give up its occupied territories, free all Palestinian prisoners being held in Israeli jails, and allow the refugees their right of return.
I also believe that there should be a two-state solution, for that is the only viable solution. I believe this because the conflict has lasted too long and there have also been Israelis who were born in Occupied Palestine as well, and they would react the same way the Palestinians are now if we were to make the entire territory Palestine again. Although, a majority of the territory should belong to the Palestinians.

[Jesus Christ!]

Hahah LSD's perscription is nothign short of ignorant. This isn't the most pressing issue in the world today but it also isn't something that we can ignore and say is unimportant unless directly affected. Our continual support of Israel is the reason that so much of the Islamic middle east despises us. We need to bang out a solution there for peace or we are all affected. Saying that happenings in the middle east only pertain to those in the middle east shows a very narrow world view.

[Reuben]

Saying that happenings in the middle east only pertain to those in the middle east shows a very narrow world view.

where did he say this?

Our continual support of Israel is the reason that so much of the Islamic middle east despises us.

So if america stuck to supporting the theocratic fascists running saudi arabia, selling weapons to middle eastern tyrants, deposing democratic regimes (IE Iran before shah) relations would be fine and dandy?

[Jesus Christ!]

Originally posted by "LSD"
Look, obviously if you are Palestinian or live in the area, this is a pressing issue; but for the rest of us, this is a minor situation at most.


In response to your other question, honestly?yes relations would be much better. Does that mean that we should support these people? no. People see this as a religious war with a christain nation backing a judaic nation against Islamic nations.

[LSD]

This isn't the most pressing issue in the world today

You're damn right it isn't, but it seems that someone needs to explain that to CNN, not to mention the bulk of the mainstream "left".

Again, I am not suggesting that this issue be "ignored", merely that it only get the attention it deserves.


Our continual support of Israel is the reason that so much of the Islamic middle east despises us.

:lol:

So it has nothing to do with the US's bloody history of supporting brutal dictators and enforcing an oppressive economic and political hierarchy at the barrel of an M16?

Even Osama Bin Ladin only lists the Israeli situation as one of three primary complaints with the United States, and more rational Middle Eastern anti-americans are even less myopic in their analysis.

After all, hatred for the United States is not limited to nations who border with Israel. Across Africa, Asia, and South America, the same kind of resentment and distrust can be found, primarily because of the US', frankly, atrocious history of bloody imperialism.

That is unless you are suggesting that Chavez opposes the US out of loyality to Palestine! :lol:


We need to bang out a solution there for peace or we are all affected.

No, "we" need to get the fuck out of there.

Over the past 30 years, the single biggest obstacle to a "peace plan" in Israel has been the United States. It is simply not in her interest to have this issue "settled".

On the contrary, this is the perfect distraction by which the American rulling class can keep recalcitrant dissidents focused on a, fundamentally, trivial dispute.

Not to mention that this allows rightists to conflate opposition to imperialism with antisemitism, something which far too much of the left has made much easier by buying into the disturbing idealist myth of a "Jewish" guilt for Israeli policy.

The government of Israel is an oppressive shit, but then so are most governments that the US supports; Colombia, Pakistan, and "Iraq" being obvious examples.

In none of these places, however, is further US intervention a viable "solution".


Originally posted by YKTMX
Do you have many other examples of 40 year old military occupations backed by imperialism after a ferocious land-grab?

Sure.

Tibet, Kashmir, Cuba, the western Sahara, Northern Cyprus, Western New Guinea, Northern Ireland, etc...

[EwokUtopia]

Israel is a fascist police state for its part, where every male must do military service and oppress the people that lived there peacefully with Jews before the post-holocaust Ashkenazi exodus. Of course, most Israeli's are innocent, albiet ignorant, it is their state and their leaders who commit these evils. So what if they are the most "liberal" state in the mid-east, their liberality really only applies to Israeli's, and more specifically, Ashkenazi Israeli's. Black Israeli's are almost as oppressed as Arab Israeli's, and even more oppressed than Arab Israeli's are the Palestinians who live inside the occupied Palestinian lands that havnt been made into the state of Israel. In my belief, it is all Palestine, I only refer to Israel as a nation state, the nation state is built on Palestine, there is no geographic land called Israel. However, what I would like to happen after the dismantling of the fascist Israeli state is for the Jews and Arabs to coexist, and eventually and inevitably intermarry and be equals. If you look at the history of the land, that seems to be what is going to happen. Palestinians as we know them are decended from many different ethnic groups, Arabs, old Israelite Jews, Romans, Greeks, Philistines, Canaanites, Turks, even some Crusaders who remained in the area and adopted the culture.
Now as for the defeat of the Fascist Israeli state, there is only one way to do it, get the Israeli youth to wake up and smell the oppression and stand up against it. The worst thing that could happen is for Israeli's to be blind to this oppression until after some horrible atrocity occurs and history is repeated once more. It happened with the German youth, they liked their prosperous state which gave them a reasonable amount of freedom, and then they forgot where that prosperity came from, and before they knew it, they found their government had commited the greatest crime I can think of off bat. Israel isnt quite at that stage yet, but I predict a very turbulent decade coming up rather soon. It is up to the Israeli youth to overthrow this injustice, and it is up to the Palestinian people to arouse the Israeli youth.
The two state solution is not a viable long term solution, the Israeli's and Palestinians need to either live together or they will die in centuries of conflict. Intermarriage is the best way to stop this from happening. Plus the two state solution carries with it the implication that the nation-state system will be around for a long while longer, which I find doubtful at best.

[WUOrevolt]

When I mentioned the two state solution, I meant it as an immediate solution to stop the conflict. I too believe that the nation state system will soon be crushed.

[WorkerBolshevik]

When I mentioned the two state solution, I meant it as an immediate solution to stop the conflict. I too believe that the nation state system will soon be crushed.
Here's whats wrong with that logic, calling for two seperate state at any time. First, as we all know, the Israelis and the Palestinians both claim the same land. Now with that in mind, let's assume that the level that the Palestinians would be happy to receive is somewhere under 100%. No matter what they (the Palestinians) would be realisticly pleased with receiving, the Israeli bourgeoisie will never give them that much, and in fact will not give them any less than the current boundry that they are drawing with their walls, ever. By calling for a two state solution, you are hitching the Israeli and Palestinian Proletarians to their respective bourgeoisies; with the dangerous, illusionary, and reformist hope that 1. the Palestinian Bourgeois has anything to offer to the Palestinians toilers (other than a represive state of their own), and more importantly 2. that the Israeli Bourgeoisie is somehow progressive, and that through petitioning them the Palestinians can find liberation, allbeit temporarily.
What is really needed in Israel-Palestine and the Near East as a whole is working class mobilization against their respective capitalists. Now, this most likely will not start in either Israel or occupied Palestine, but rather will be inspired as workers activism increases throughout the rest of the region and around the world (as is beggining to happen). Through such activism, revolutionary must respect the Palestinian right, as a nation oppressed by Imperialism, to self-determination. The only peaceful conclusion to the whole conflict can be the creation of a Palestinian workers' state (as Palestinians are the majority) which respects the rights of ALL minority workers, working towards socialism and federation with other workers states across Asia and the world.

[bayano]

responses to some of the posts:

i oppose the two-state solution and support the destruction of israel. why? bcuz of a combination of study of the situation and discussions of palestinians themselves. we should follow their lead, and yes there is division, but the revolutionaries of falasteen/palestine done want two (opposing) states, one underdeveloped and the other among the wealthiest and most militarized. not an option.

next, that US pulling out of israel should be done is correct (tho i would go further and demand reparations from the usa), but the reasoning people like Jesus Christ! gives is problematic. the usa should butt out bcuz it would help reduce an unjust equation, not bcuz it will help the US's standing in the world. frankly, i would hope the US would be less popular with the people of the world rather than more popular. if the US actually ever pulled out of israel, i would hope the people of the world would see it as a victory against imperialism rather than as some sign of imperial benevolence

[EwokUtopia]

Israel should not be destroyed. Power should be removed from the fascist zionist blackshirts, but that will not happen by way of war. One of the worst things would be if Israel was bombed to hell. Why? "Israel" IS Palestine. Where are the consumeristic hellholes of Tel Aviv and Haifa built upon but Palestinian towns. Furthermore, the Israeli people themselves are not guilty to the point where they should be made homeless, or worse. In fact, if there is any hope of the peaceful dismantlement of the Imperialist Occupational State (and a non-peaceful solution is tragicly dangerous, as the nuclear power of Israel is quite real) comes from the Israeli people themselves. This wont happen now, the system will have to wither away before the people are willing to listen to reason, and the system will wither, whether bye workers rights assertion, or the gradual and inevitable collapse of a system based on the impossible notion of infinite expansion, the system WILL collapse, then the Israeli people and the Palestinian people have to make the choice between killing eachother until somebody wins, or working together for the common good of the land which they now must share. What we need is a no state solution. Before the advent of the Nation state, when Palestine was a part of a greater, yet not national by any means, realm, the Arabs and the Jews lived side-by-side, and Jews enjoyed such equality there as was impossible to dream of in oppressive Europe. More effort should be spent on enlightening the Israeli people, because many are ignorant to the truth and willing to believe the lies of the Goebbles-esque zionist propaganda machine. The Israeli people need to be liberated as well as the Palestinians, as well as the Iraqi's, as well as the Americans. The citizens of occupational imperialist nations are occupied as well. They dont complain because they are fed with many cheap goods, but they are exploited and ensnared by neopliberalism just as the people of Iraq, or Haiti, or any number of places are exploited, just in different ways. Yes Free Palestine, but free every person who has a scrap of good left who treds on the soil of Palestine, be they Arab or Jew, Druze or Samaratan, free them.

[bayano]

see, thats an incredibly narrow reading of 'down with israel'. israel is a racial state, and i oppose such things, at least and especially when it is not the indigenous racial group and they subjugate others. smashing israel doesnt mean removing all of the jews from falasteen- it means having a multi-ethnic and multi-religious nation. and that means with jews and palestinians (muslim and christian), and all of the palestinian refugees who should have their full right to return.

[EwokUtopia]

And I agree with you, but the dismantling of the Israeli aparthied state MUST be conducted carefully. It will not come as the result of an all out war, indeed, such a conflict would have a bad end for all who dwell in the region. Resistance shall come from Palestinians, but if a war breaks out between Israel and the rest of the nations of the mid east, I dont see there being a good result for either side, war is far too dangerous in the post-modern world. Their system will collapse eventually, I have little doubt of that. the two state solution doesnt solve anything, the one state solution creats haphazards from either point of view, there must be a no state solution. Palestine is Palestine, it is not some arbitrary lines drawn on a map by British Imperialists. it will be a very turbulent decade for the people of Palestine, and eventually even the Israelis. When both people feel the negative effects of the same system that oppresses the land (expansionistic zionism) there will either be peace or there will be war. Smash the Israeli state yes, but the smashing of a state should be the shattering of evil ideals, not the destruction of its people or land (though Tel Aviv architecture is ugly and consumeristic and should be quite seriously redone). Then let all who have been forced out return, if more than 200 million can live in tiny Bangladesh, 30 million can live in Palestine.

And Israel is somewhat scarier than a racial state. It is a religious/racial state, the notions of Israeli supremacy are derrived from their God, which is a rather scary thought, and is reminicient of the Afrikaners notions of superiority that they derrived from an extremly corrupted version of christianity. Israel is based on perversions of Jewish faith and culture, the sooner Israel as we know it ceases to be, the sooner Jewish culture in that region will be pure and good once more.

[Majkrazam]

Why don't the Arabs just give peace a chance? Seriously.

[Intifada]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2006, 08:02 PM
Why don't the Arabs just give peace a chance? Seriously.
Why doesn't Israel recognise that the illegal occupation must end before peace can be given a chance?

At no point have the Israelis conceded that the illegal occupation must come to a total end.

The Palestinians will - rightly so - only accept a peace which entails the complete end of the illegal occupation and the return of Palestinian refugees.

[Majkrazam]

At no point have the Israelis conceded that the illegal occupation must come to a total end.

You think that they want it to go on?


illegal occupation

Well shouldn't the Muslims think of it as a Jihad for the Jews? To reclaim their lost land?

[Reuben]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2006, 08:02 PM
Why don't the Arabs just give peace a chance? Seriously.
what a stupid question to ask. 'The Arabs' as you put it more than gasve peace a chance when at oslo they made the enormous compromise of recognising Israel in 78 per cent of what was formerly Palestine. The fact that peace is not a reality reflects in part the inability of the Israeli government to make any reciprocal compromise . Instead after oslo the palestinains suffered years of continued occupation and all the suffering entailed in that broken up only by the duplicity showed by Barak when he made his so called 'generous offer' - an offer of a 'state' in which carved up by annexed settlement areas, a 'state' which for an indefinite amount of time would not even control its own borders or airspace. To ask now 'why don't the arabs just give peace a chance' runs counter to history.

[Intifada]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2006, 08:30 PM
You think that they want it to go on?
The Israeli leaders sure act as if they do.


Well shouldn't the Muslims think of it as a Jihad for the Jews? To reclaim their lost land?

Nobody has the right to force out a whole people from their homeland.

[Majkrazam]

Whos fault is that though? The damn insurgents. Why don't they just accept Israel as a state?

[Lord Testicles]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2006, 09:50 PM
Whos fault is that though? The damn insurgents. Why don't they just accept Israel as a state?
If a country popped out of no were and said that your country was now theirs and started driving you off your land and killing you I think you be pretty pissed.

[Majkrazam]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2006, 08:47 PM
Nobody has the right to force out a whole people from their homeland.
Ok fine I'll end it here because I'll ultimatley end up using Old Testament Quotes to prove that wrong, so you win. : )

[Reuben]

because israel was founded on palestinian land. Because its jewish character was established through the ethnic cleansing of 700,000 palestinians and accepting Israel's borders means accepting the right of the Israeli state to determine whether thsoe people who were ethnically cleansed have the right to return, because Israel is as a states racist against palestinians.


are you a zionist majkrazam?

[Intifada]

The resistance and terrorism is a product of continued Israeli occupation.

When the Palestinians accepted that Israel should remain as a state built upon 78% of historic Palestine, in the late 1980s, Israel did not follow such a concession up with the recognition of the basic rights of the Palestinian people.

Israel has so far looked for a one-sided "peace" in which the Palestinians will continue to be stateless and occupied.

What do you think Palestinians will do in the face of such injustice?

[DaRk-OnE]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2006, 09:15 PM
I just wanted to see why everyones views were so one sided.
one sided eh ? Being right and speaking the Truth is not being one sided .

[The Grey Blur]

The only way to bring about any change in Palestine is for unity between the Palestinian masses and the Israeli working-class - the Palestinian ruling class is more than happy to continue the occupation and the Israeli elite is hardly going to develop a national conscience and begin dismantling itself

So an equal two-state solution would be a logical first-step but a properly Socialist Palestine is the eventual goal


I still continued the topic though
The count-down to restriction begins now!

[Reuben]

ok lets get back to the discussion. I jumped through your hoop of saying something nice about israel.#
you were aksed by more than one person why israel was jewish land...

[Jesus Christ!]

Originally posted by LSD+Jun 6 2006, 02:32 AM--> (LSD @ Jun 6 2006, 02:32 AM)
This isn't the most pressing issue in the world today

You're damn right it isn't, but it seems that someone needs to explain that to CNN, not to mention the bulk of the mainstream "left".

Again, I am not suggesting that this issue be "ignored", merely that it only get the attention it deserves.


Our continual support of Israel is the reason that so much of the Islamic middle east despises us.

:lol:

So it has nothing to do with the US's bloody history of supporting brutal dictators and enforcing an oppressive economic and political hierarchy at the barrel of an M16?

Even Osama Bin Ladin only lists the Israeli situation as one of three primary complaints with the United States, and more rational Middle Eastern anti-americans are even less myopic in their analysis.

After all, hatred for the United States is not limited to nations who border with Israel. Across Africa, Asia, and South America, the same kind of resentment and distrust can be found, primarily because of the US', frankly, atrocious history of bloody imperialism.

That is unless you are suggesting that Chavez opposes the US out of loyality to Palestine! :lol:


We need to bang out a solution there for peace or we are all affected.

No, "we" need to get the fuck out of there.

Over the past 30 years, the single biggest obstacle to a "peace plan" in Israel has been the United States. It is simply not in her interest to have this issue "settled".

On the contrary, this is the perfect distraction by which the American rulling class can keep recalcitrant dissidents focused on a, fundamentally, trivial dispute.

Not to mention that this allows rightists to conflate opposition to imperialism with antisemitism, something which far too much of the left has made much easier by buying into the disturbing idealist myth of a "Jewish" guilt for Israeli policy.

The government of Israel is an oppressive shit, but then so are most governments that the US supports; Colombia, Pakistan, and "Iraq" being obvious examples.

In none of these places, however, is further US intervention a viable "solution".


YKTMX
Do you have many other examples of 40 year old military occupations backed by imperialism after a ferocious land-grab?

Sure.

Tibet, Kashmir, Cuba, the western Sahara, Northern Cyprus, Western New Guinea, Northern Ireland, etc... [/b]
So a generally history of imperialism is enough to make the islamic middle east to despise us? Just a general history? are you serious? I think an example of US backed imperialism gives much more of a reason for hatred than just a general history of it. And if a general history is enough then why doesn't the middle east despise Portugal? I mean they have a pretty bloody imperial past too, but the islamic middle east doesn't seem to hate them so much.

I never said that the only states or groups that hate america are on the border of Israel.

I never said that Chavez is oppposed to the US because of palestine.

When I said "we" i meant just people in general obviously not the US government. If I supported the US government I wouldn't be a member of this message board.

How is any imperialist "dispute" trivial?

[LSD]

So a generally history of imperialism is enough to make the islamic middle east to despise us?

Well...yeah.

Why else do you suppose it is that the rest of the world hates the US with nearly as much vigour?

Do you honestly believe that Latin America's and Asia's reasons for hating the US are so different from the Arab world's? That arabs think only in terms of the "palestinians" while everyone else "thinks globaly"?

Sorry, but that is a ridiculously naive position.

Sure, the US' continued support of the Israeli occupation is not "popular" among arabs, but even if it were to end tomorrow, the hatred for the US would not.

Remember, the US is also supporting the oppressive regimes in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan, and numerous other predominently Muslim countries; and has been doing so for decades.


I think an example of US backed imperialism gives much more of a reason for hatred than just a general history of it.

"General histories" are composed of examples.

The people of Iran, for instance, largely hate the US because its role in overthrowing their democratic government and installing a brutal dictator. Likewise, the people of Iraq hate the US because of its role in proping up Saddaam.

Again, the Israeli issue is a convienient "rallying issue", but for most of the region, it's ultimately secondary.


And if a general history is enough then why doesn't the middle east despise Portugal? I mean they have a pretty bloody imperial past too, but the islamic middle east doesn't seem to hate them so much.

:huh:

What imperialist history does Portugal have in the middle east?


How is any imperialist "dispute" trivial?

Because it effects, at most around ten million people and there are imperialist conflicts with far greater impact going on right now.

Again, I am not saying that this issue does not deserve attention, it just does not deserve nearly as much attention as it's presently getting.

[EwokUtopia]

Peace will come when the occupation stops, not before. The occupation will stop when the American system either crashes, which it is likely to do once oil runs dry, or stops supporting the aparthied. That is where I as a westerner play in, it is our job to see that our people leave the area alone and let justice occur. Under imperialism there can be no justice.

[EwokUtopia]

What we must also guard against is if the aparthied policies of Israel end and arabs and Jews live in harmony like we would all hope for, that the new, peaceful region doesnt get controlled by capitalist swine, the same as before but with less hatred, like what happened to South Africa.

[emma_goldman]

I agree with your skepticism. My idea on the subject, which is rapidly changing, is that Israel should not be a state. Allow the citizens to stay, they probably weren't even alive when this happened and this is their home now.

I&#39;m kind of confused by your reference to Israel as one of the most socialist states. I think you have current Israel confused with a much earlier one. At first Zionism was not the dogmatic expansionist idealogy it is today, Zionists were Jewish people who did not even want a "Jewish state" but who only wanted the ability to live in their ancient homeland and work the land which (for the non-secular) believed this brought them closer to God. And their movement was primarily socialist, they stayed in the beloved kibbutzim (which, yes, is still around today but points to the socialism of Israel as much as a commune in California points to the socialism of the United States <_< ).

[Fawkes]

This topic has been thoroughly discussed before. I don&#39;t have time right now to go into detail about my views on this matter but I will sumarize them by saying that I support the total destruction of Israel and I support the use of violence to achieve this.

[Operation Red Flag]

I support the total destruction of Israel and I support the use of violence to achieve this.
By &#39;total&#39; I take it you mean the people of Israel as well. Interesting stance their comrade, discuss it some more on this brilliant website - www.***************

:rolleyes:

[Phalanx]

Originally posted by Freedom for [email protected] 12 2006, 06:40 PM
I support the total destruction of Israel and I support the use of violence to achieve this.
It&#39;s people like you that really make it sound like there is rampant anti-semitism in the left.

[CCCPneubauten]

Originally posted by Chinghis Khan+Jun 12 2006, 08:02 PM--> (Chinghis Khan @ Jun 12 2006, 08:02 PM)
Freedom for [email protected] 12 2006, 06:40 PM
I support the total destruction of Israel and I support the use of violence to achieve this.
It&#39;s people like you that really make it sound like there is rampant anti-semitism in the left. [/b]
I agree, that was one of the most Anti-Semetic comments I&#39;ve seen on here. :angry:

[Rawthentic]

yeah, that comment about destroying Israel was a pretty extremist comment, not to mention anti-Semitic. Why is it that you believe that? Do you think that as a radical leftist, it is right for one to advocate the destruction of a nation and its people with violence? i really dont think so

[Niemand]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2006, 11:52 PM
yeah, that comment about destroying Israel was a pretty extremist comment, not to mention anti-Semitic. Why is it that you believe that? Do you think that as a radical leftist, it is right for one to advocate the destruction of a nation and its people with violence? i really dont think so
Being anti-Israel isn&#39;t being anti-semetic. And just because he wants to destroy Israel doesn&#39;t mean he wants all the people dead, it might just mean that he wants Israel&#39;s gov&#39;t to stop existing. Hell, I want the nations of the world to be destoryed, but that just means that I want there to be an abolishment of nations and to let the world live as one.

[Phalanx]

It&#39;s not that he just said that he wanted Israel to be destroyed, he supports violence in doing so. So, most would come to the conclusion that he advocates the killing of Israelis. It&#39;s not just plain anti-Zionism, because normally people would rather have the dismantling of the state in a more peaceful manner.

[Operation Red Flag]

I don&#39;t think it&#39;s do with whether it&#39;s violent or not (most Leftists have no objection to revolutionary volence) it&#39;s the fact that a &#39;total destruction of Israel&#39; is a completely immature way to look at the conflict. Destroying Israel won&#39;t make 6 million Jews disappear, and it certainly wouldn&#39;t benefit the creation of Socialism which requires the Palestinian and Israeli working-classes to unite.

All nation-states should be dismantled but not at the cost of their people

[bcbm]

It&#39;s not that he just said that he wanted Israel to be destroyed, he supports violence in doing so.

And? How else do you propose Israel be destroyed, by asking nicely? :huh:


So, most would come to the conclusion that he advocates the killing of Israelis.

And? I advocate the killing of Israelis as well. And Palestinians, Jordanians, United Statesians, Brazilians and a whole mess more. Or, to be more specific: I advocate killing oppressors (in self-defense, yeah yeah), as I assumed most on the revolutionary left did...


It&#39;s not just plain anti-Zionism, because normally people would rather have the dismantling of the state in a more peaceful manner.

I think we&#39;d all rather, but that isn&#39;t reality.


it&#39;s the fact that a &#39;total destruction of Israel&#39; is a completely immature way to look at the conflict. Destroying Israel won&#39;t make 6 million Jews disappear, and it certainly wouldn&#39;t benefit the creation of Socialism which requires the Palestinian and Israeli working-classes to unite.

Leaving colonial states and their colonial practices intact won&#39;t benefit the creation of socialism either. The Palestinian and Israeli working-classes definitely need to unite, in order to destroy the state of Israel&#33; Though one could also argue that they&#39;ll have a difficult time with that before the state is destroyed. Working-class interests could be viewed as more of a common-cause issue under a joint Israeli-Palestinian state.

[Operation Red Flag]

Israel expanded illegitamately into Palestinian territory years ago, that fight is over. The current generation of young Israelis have no connection to these atrocities and openly condemn the occupation of Palestinian land.


The Palestinian and Israeli working-classes definitely need to unite, in order to destroy the state of Israel&#33;
And the state of Palestine&#33;

And all states&#33;


Working-class interests could be viewed as more of a common-cause issue under a joint Israeli-Palestinian state.
No, it&#39;s the only solution to the conflict. If we want to create Socialism we should not cloud it with "anti-Imperialist" messages of "waiting" for it. We want it now

[bcbm]

Israel expanded illegitamately into Palestinian territory years ago, that fight is over. The current generation of young Israelis have no connection to these atrocities and openly condemn the occupation of Palestinian land.

That fight isn&#39;t really over, since, uh, Palestinian territory remains subject to occupation. I&#39;m not condemning any Israelis, except the ruling classes who continue it.


And the state of Palestine&#33;

And all states&#33;

Now you&#39;re talking&#33;


No, it&#39;s the only solution to the conflict. If we want to create Socialism we should not cloud it with "anti-Imperialist" messages of "waiting" for it. We want it now

I don&#39;t think we should wait, but I also think the situation on the ground needs to be addressed now, by ending imperialism.

[WUOrevolt]

For the question of recognizing Israel, Very interesting:

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/0A4...267C05406B7.htm (http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/0A46ECCD-F827-4CAC-A3B8-8267C05406B7.htm)