It's really a shame(thinking as a zionist)

[damn the capitalism]

hi everybody, i know and i feel tht u r surprised by this forum,and everyone is asking himself :"What a weird question? what DTC is asking for? Of course we all disagree with this sharon"
But i think that this is a litlle bit wrong, coz not everyone share the same idea ,and that's surprising me so much and i feel so sorry and angry about what is saying or got a different point of view and he give excuses and support what is done in the palestinian lands!

So i guess most of us are against sharon andIsrael policy ,but as i say that there still in our world today people who agree and there's still peoples who got zionists ideas (even if they not zionist peoople) ,so i feel sorry for this guy

What i will post right now is 1 opinion between thousands and thousdans of those who support sharon and give excuses for the israeliens and they are doing in the palestinians lands !i think it's a big SHAME!

What i will post now is MARXISGOD (one of he member in this website) ideas and words and EXTRACTS on a forum called ZIONISTS in POLITICS forumu can even go check it)
------- -------- -------- -------- -------- ------- -------- ------ -----

Though I wholeheartedly support Israel and feel that it should defend itself at all costs.....

If Israel controls lands from which people come to commit acts of terrorism against Israel, wouldn't there be more attacks if Israel leaves? Also, Israel has never gone into another countries business. It has simply tried to promote its own interests on the international stage. Israel has never invaded another country and all of the wars it has fought with Middle Eastern nations have been a result of the army(ies) of one the Arab nations crossing Israeli borders.

OH GOD HE IS SAYING ISRAEL DIDN'T INVADE ANOTHER COUNTRY, I THINK GUY IS TALKING IN ANOTHER HISTORY:-dHE FORGOT ABOUT :
iSRAEL IN PALESTINE IN 1948
iSRAEL IN EGYPT AND SYRIA IN 1967
iSRAEL IN THE gULAN LAND IN SYRIA
iSRAEL IN THE SOUTH OF LEBANON ON THE 80'S
iSRAEL AND THE CRIMES OF SHARON IN THE LANDSOF SABRA-SHETILLA IN LEBANON
ISREAL AT OUR PRESENT TIME AT GAZA AND EL DAFA!
MAYBE HE FORGOT:-DDDDD

The 12 Palestinians killed yesterday were killed when Israeli troops went in to capture a prominent terrorist leader. When they came to his house, they were fired upon by several Palestinian civilians and had no choice but to shoot back. Other Palestinians were killed/injured simply because they were stupid enough to stand and watch this affair going on. If the Israeli army is bringing in troops and tanks to capture a terrorist and they exchange gunfire with some civilians, you would think other people would have the common sense to run to safety.
HE SAID THE PALESTINIANS ARE STUPID ,JUST BECAUSE THEY WANT TOSAVE THEIR LANDS AND FIGHT THE INVADERS!

--------- --------- ------- ----------- ---------- -------- --------
I think now u understand my point ,i think it's ab ig problem when we find peoples think by this bad way! it's so pathetic :-D
THANX!

[Klondike]

I agree, Zionism is extremely reactionary, nationalistic, and counterrevolutionary to our cause!

[Tasha]

In my opinion to be a zionist you either are very biased or uneducated.

[Zombie]

just how many of these threads revolving around the SAME damn subject do we have to open???

[MarxIsGod]

I agree with zombie. All these threads about Zionism and Sharon and exactly the same and most of them are being started by DTC and are directed at me, not out of a desire to communicate, but out of a desire to insult me by making untrue assumptions about my political beliefs.

[MarxIsGod]

:angry:

[il Commy]

Zionism. People usually relate this ideology to it's mainstream - the supporters of a jewish state. People usually forget the leftish side of zionism, maybe because it is extremely small today.

No, I'm not talking about social-democrat (social-chovinist) parties and movements like Meretz or Am Ehad (the latter is based on trade-unions so I might consider voting for them on the next elections). Of course I'm not talking about our so-called 'Labour' party, the falling-apart opportunist party.

I'm talking about the ideas the 'Hashomer-Hatzair' had before they became another social-chovinist movement. The recognition of the jews right for self-determination in their long-abandoned homeland like all nations - in subordination to the world-wide socialist revolution.

Marxists believe in centralism, not in many small national states. But as a part of the socialist revolution we must insist on the democratic rights of the workers, one of them is the right for self-determenation. I consider the zionism as any other self-determenation bourgeois movement - we must help it release itself from the imperialism (UK 55 years ago, US & the globalization today) but stop it from conquering other nations (Palestine) and destroy it in a communist revolution of the proletarians and the peasants.

And as for the question of what would be the state situation after the revolution - because of the hostility between arabs and jews and because of the refugees problem I believe that in the begining there must be 2 states - Israel and Palestine in the borders of '67 (Palestine in the west bank and Gaza). Both a part from a middle-east soviet federation. The return and the compensations for the '48 Nakba refugees should be handled very carefully and diligently, bulding new houses for the refugees which returns and setting the ground for co-existence between jews and palestinians (mostly through education). Than, after all the refugees will be back or compensated and the consciousness of the people will be ready for co-existence, we will be able to unite the two states to one. After this, our next goal would be to unite the whole middle-east under socialism, then the world.

[MarxIsGod]

Quote: from damn the capitalism on 5:22 pm on May 5, 2003
hi everybody, i know and i feel tht u r surprised by this forum,and everyone is asking himself :"What a weird question? what DTC is asking for? Of course we all disagree with this sharon"

DTC,

Just FYI, Sharon does equal Zionism. While he may have views that could be construed (sp) as Zionist, he himself is not a Zionist.
:angry:

[damn the capitalism]

If Israel controls lands from which people come to commit acts of terrorism against Israel, wouldn't there be more attacks if Israel leaves? Also, Israel has never gone into another countries business. It has simply tried to promote its own interests on the international stage. Israel has never invaded another country and all of the wars it has fought with Middle Eastern nations have been a result of the army(ies) of one the Arab nations crossing Israeli borders.

OH GOD HE IS SAYING ISRAEL DIDN'T INVADE ANOTHER COUNTRY, I THINK GUY IS TALKING IN ANOTHER HISTORY:-dHE FORGOT ABOUT :
iSRAEL IN PALESTINE IN 1948
iSRAEL IN EGYPT AND SYRIA IN 1967
iSRAEL IN THE gULAN LAND IN SYRIA
iSRAEL IN THE SOUTH OF LEBANON ON THE 80'S
iSRAEL AND THE CRIMES OF SHARON IN THE LANDSOF SABRA-SHETILLA IN LEBANON
ISREAL AT OUR PRESENT TIME AT GAZA AND EL DAFA!
MAYBE HE FORGOT:-DDDDD

=========
i just wanted to tell u ,that your references is full of bullshit and it's soooo damned false.
The next time before saying a view or a something ,make sure that it's true and it;s not any bullshit that sound as u!
so go to another teacher or another reference to get some right informations!
but what u wrote made me and my friends really laugh about your poor mind!;-D

[MarxIsGod]

I am tired of your tirades, illegable messages in all caps, and incapacity for civil conversation and discussison.

[damn the capitalism]

i think this that israel is an addict of invasion the others country and their aim is to invade and make their country bigger!so the only way is to invade,killing,commtting crimes against humanity,.....!
once again when u say something ,make sure that's right to prevent peoples think that u r an idiot!

[Severian]

Quote: from il Commy on 7:24 pm on May 7, 2003
Zionism. People usually relate this ideology to it's mainstream - the supporters of a jewish state. People usually forget the leftish side of zionism, maybe because it is extremely small today.

No, I'm not talking about social-democrat (social-chovinist) parties and movements like Meretz or Am Ehad (the latter is based on trade-unions so I might consider voting for them on the next elections). Of course I'm not talking about our so-called 'Labour' party, the falling-apart opportunist party.

I'm talking about the ideas the 'Hashomer-Hatzair' had before they became another social-chovinist movement. The recognition of the jews right for self-determination in their long-abandoned homeland like all nations - in subordination to the world-wide socialist revolution.

Marxists believe in centralism, not in many small national states. But as a part of the socialist revolution we must insist on the democratic rights of the workers, one of them is the right for self-determenation. I consider the zionism as any other self-determenation bourgeois movement - we must help it release itself from the imperialism (UK 55 years ago, US & the globalization today) but stop it from conquering other nations (Palestine) and destroy it in a communist revolution of the proletarians and the peasants.

And as for the question of what would be the state situation after the revolution - because of the hostility between arabs and jews and because of the refugees problem I believe that in the begining there must be 2 states - Israel and Palestine in the borders of '67 (Palestine in the west bank and Gaza). Both a part from a middle-east soviet federation. The return and the compensations for the '48 Nakba refugees should be handled very carefully and diligently, bulding new houses for the refugees which returns and setting the ground for co-existence between jews and palestinians (mostly through education). Than, after all the refugees will be back or compensated and the consciousness of the people will be ready for co-existence, we will be able to unite the two states to one. After this, our next goal would be to unite the whole middle-east under socialism, then the world.


OK, an interesting post. Most other posters in this thread seem confused about what Zionism is. Basically:
before the creation of Israel, it meant support for creating Israel, or a Jewish state. Now, it means support for Israel. Hit the dictionary button on your web browser if you don't believe me.

So yes, Sharon is a Zionist, and so is the Israeli Labor Party, and most of the Israeli peace movement, and even most of the refuseniks - the ones who won't fight in the occupied territories, but are willing to fight to defend the 1948 borders of Israel. About the only people in Israeli politics who aren't Zionists are the so-called Arab parties, though one of them, Hadash, also has a significant degree of Jewish support.

Back to il Commy's post.

I don't think any kind of Zionism, including socialist-Zionism, could've led to anything different from what Israel is today.

Anyone who wanted to create a Jewish state in Palestine, already densely populated, had to do one of two things.

1. Get rid of enough Arabs so that Jews would be a majority. This is what happened in 1948. Or:

2. Don't let the Arabs have any say in the state, so the state will still be Jewish even if Arabs are they majority. This is what happened in 1967.

Either way, the Arabs will be hostile to it, and the support of some imperialist power would be needed to help the settlers against the natives.

Something different might be possible in another, more sparsely populated area, on the basis of socialism. Biro-Bidjan in the USSR was an attempt at this. I wouldn't say it was wholly successful, because of the overall problems of the USSR. But it wasn't a nightmare of unending war like Israel is.

The "socialist" Zionists were even worse for the Arab peasants than the bourgeois Zionists. The bourgeois Zionists would buy land, then rent it out to Arab peasants just as the Arab landowners had done. The "socialist" Zionist evicted the Arab peasants in order to set up kibbutzes or other farms employing Jewish labor. They also insisted that industries employ Jewish, not Arab labor.

So the "socialist" Zionists forced Arab peasants off the land and blocked the formation of an Arab working class. And they ensured that the Jewish settlers would not just be a thin ruling elite, but a full spectrum of classes.

Really, they had a lot to do with how Israel looks today. Without the "socialist" Zionists, the settlers might have become a thin ruling layer over an Arab working class, which could have been overthrown far more easily.

As for your suggestion for a solution under socialism, it amounts to promising Palestinians pie-in-the-sky while telling them to keep rotting in refugee camps today. Someday, after a socialist revolution, we'll gradually allow you to return.

What about today? Do you support forcibly keeping people from returning to their homes, or not? If yes, that's just after-the-fact support to ethnic cleansing.

Keep them out as long as possible, keep delaying, the Israeli rulers hope, wait for the generation born in what's now Israel to die. The longer they delay, they hope, the better the chances for keeping them out forever. And you're helping in that delay.

And the proposals for an "independent" Palestinian state are nothing but a Bantustan plan. If Israel is forced to withdraw from the West Bank and Gaza, that's an advance, of course. But to speak of this as a post-revolution "socialist" solution....it's national socialism.

A "socialist" Jewish state where Palestinians will remain second-class citizens? Yes, what about the Palestinians who currently live inside Israel proper? Do you expect them to live indefinitely as stepchildren of a state that's not theirs?

(Edited by Severian at 9:21 pm on May 7, 2003)