• P03 Locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Because the world is filled with nuance and shitty solutions.

    I defend that Israel is a country, and don’t defend arguments based on ancient grudges from decades past. I’m not even defending what Israel is currently doing, but what solutions do you think they should be doing in response to a terrorist attack? (Which was the last straw in a series of terrorist attacks.)

    • DarkNightoftheSoul@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Last straw my left nut, this is merely the latest in a series of campaigns committed by both sides in this 80 year mutually-retributive open warfare. “Last straw” he says. This “last straw” is just the next straw- the next provoked “justification” for the next wave of seizure and occupation of every other house on the block, by way of outright murder and starvation and any other means necessary (read: slow-roll ethnic cleansing by way of genocide).

      As for what the secular and interested nation of israel- the supposed “Land of the Jews”- should do? They should start, if they were actually motivated by the spirit and not by lucre, by opening the Torah and observing the wisdom from Exodus: An eye for an eye means to restrict compensation/retribution to the exact nature of the loss, and I invite you to figure some of the many nuanced ways that could apply here. They could stop pretending they are the sole victims and not-at-all perpetrators. They could find peace with their neighbors, they could stop murdering and harassing and starving and raping and kidnapping and torturing and pulling their land from their cold, dead hands as was, in point of fact, the ultimate intention of the other atrocities, despite so much peaceful rhetoric. An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.

      An excellent first step would be calling a truce. An excellent next step would be deposing the current bloody-minded ruling party. An excellent third step would be to make amends and disburse reparations, starting with the schools, hospitals and critical infrastructure they have destroyed, fourth ceding the gradually encroached (to the point of the article) territory. I’m willing to bet for my own (admittedly useless) part that the peoples of Palestine and israel would settle at this point for the two state solution if it meant a lasting peace- if ever two leading parties were morally sane enough to propose it to each other in good faith and bold enough to resist outside pressures against it, “river to sea” notwithstanding. USA & Co. could still keep its slice of Suez pie, even.

      Christ, can you imagine it? Jews and Arabs living side-by-side in peace and harmony, except actually, and that across the entire region?

      • P03 Locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        I’m willing to bet for my own (admittedly useless) part that the peoples of Palestine and israel would settle at this point for the two state solution if it meant a lasting peace

        You mean the Oslo Accords? Remind me again who fucked that one up?

        • DarkNightoftheSoul@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          I seem to recall hardliner elements of both plo and israel being very much involved in fucking that up, to the tune of the mass shooting at the cave of the patriarchs, and israeli militants’ assassination of pm rabin, as well as suicide bombings from jihadists and a general feeling among palestinian militant groups that palestine had no real hand in the negotiation feeding a resentment against the proposed peace; however, since the oslo accords did not at all recognize the palestinian state it is emphatically not what I meant by “two state solution.”

          remember now?