{Thread about Israel & Palestine launched from} Majority Leader Schumer Delivers Major Address On Antisemitism On The Senate Floor

[Atamasama]

The irony is that the oppression is no longer necessary if the Palestinians aren’t in Israel and are in their own state that Israel has no authority over.

Yet you repeatedly argue against that. You want them to magically coexist somehow despite many generations of conflict that have escalated lately.

What you’re saying is painting an awful picture. And before you pull out the “Straw man fake news!” garbage again, this is all based entirely on what you’ve said here.

A Jewish state is necessarily oppressive. There must be one state. If the Jews are always going to oppress people, then (and this is the logical conclusion based on what you’re insisting) that state can’t be run by Jews, so ethnic Palestinians must run it.

You think that if there was one state with Palestinians in charge of a large Jewish population, everything would be rainbows and cotton candy for all involved?!

(ETA: This was directed at @InfraBlue, a post slipped in as I was composing.)

[InfraBlue]

@puzzlegal

@InfraBlue

The creation of the Zionist state exponentially exacerbated the pogroms inflicted against Jews and has served to perpetuate them. An oppressive state as a response to oppression is not the answer.

Is just false. Rudiculously so.

Again, how do you figure?

@puzzlegal

I’m not going to bother debating the first with someone who asserts the second. Because they obviously either don’t give a shit about whether Jews are routinely murdered, or at best, get their information from sources that has that view.

These are gross assumptions that serve to avoid the issue being raised.

That Jews are routinely murdered does not justify Israel’s oppression of the Palestinian people.

I do give a shit about Jews being routinely murdered. An oppressive state, antagonistic and hostile, is hardly the solution to this problem.

[InfraBlue]

Affirmative.

[FinsToTheLeft]

@InfraBlue

I do give a shit about Jews being routinely murdered. An oppressive state, antagonistic and hostile, is hardly the solution to this problem.

So why does the Muslim world - including many countries that ejected Jews - get a pass on this? Why is your ire directed solely at Israel?

[InfraBlue]

@Atamasama

The irony is that the oppression is no longer necessary if the Palestinians aren’t in Israel and are in their own state that Israel has no authority over.

This scenario avoids the issue at the core of the conflict in Palestine. Israel’s violation of the Palestinians’ rights in Palestine.

@Atamasama

Yet you repeatedly argue against that. You want them to magically coexist somehow despite many generations of conflict that have escalated lately.

One state is the only compromise solution that takes into account both parties’ claims in regard to Palestine.

The conflict has escalated precisely because of Israel’s continued oppression of the Palestinian people.

@Atamasama

A Jewish state is necessarily oppressive. There must be one state. If the Jews are always going to oppress people, then (and this is the logical conclusion based on what you’re insisting) that state can’t be run by Jews, so ethnic Palestinians must run it.

I’m not making the assumption that “the Jews are always going to oppress people;” are you?

I’m assuming that both peoples would compromise and run the state cooperatively.

@Atamasama

You think that if there was one state with Palestinians in charge of a large Jewish population, everything would be rainbows and cotton candy for all involved?!

No, I do not.

[InfraBlue]

The regional response to the creation of the state of Israel only served to exacerbate the conflict.

Grievances should be addressed by those regional states.

[silenus]

@InfraBlue

This scenario avoids the issue at the core of the conflict in Palestine. Israel’s violation of the Palestinians’ rights in Palestine.

Wrong again. You keep asserting (with zero evidence) that the oppression of Palestinians is the core issue. It isn’t. Then, when faced with the solution to the underlying, core issue, you revert to arguing the issue that isn’t.

[Dissonance]

@InfraBlue

One state is the only compromise solution that takes into account both parties’ claims in regard to Palestine.

And yet, as has been pointed out to you just by me personally for what, now the fourth time? Neither party wants this or finds it an acceptable solution. Well, barring of course those who see this as a final solution by eliminating the other party entirely.

@InfraBlue

The conflict has escalated precisely because of Israel’s continued oppression of the Palestinian people.

It’s almost like you failed to know or read that cross-border attacks from the Gaza Strip have been happening since 1948 with the creation of the Israeli state.

[FinsToTheLeft]

@InfraBlue

Grievances should be addressed by those regional states.

So you are asserting it’s of no concern to you, nor is it your business to raise these issues? Your sole concern is Israel?

[InfraBlue]

No. You are wrong.

[FinsToTheLeft]

Cite?

[InfraBlue]

So, this isn’t trolling behavior?

This individual declared that they were done here, but has continued to troll the thread.

Where’s the warning, moderators?

[InfraBlue]

If addressing these grievances is truly an issue and not a red herring to divert from the crux of the issue of the conflict, then yes they are a concern to me.

[FinsToTheLeft]

Not a red herring.

Let’s say a miracle happens and a single state solution with a peaceful democracy occurs. Do the Jews that were forced out of Muslim majority countries get to reclaim those lands and property stolen from them or no, because “it was Israel’s fault in the first place?”

How about the Indian/Pakistan partition? California/Mexico? Where does it stop and we have to work with the practicalities of things as they are today?

[Aspenglow]

Moderating:

@InfraBlue

So, this isn’t trolling behavior?

This individual declared that they were done here, but has continued to troll the thread.

Where’s the warning, moderators?

This is an accusation of trolling outside the Pit, which is not permitted. It’s also junior modding, which is also not permitted.

Cease with these attacks on other posters immediately. Your ice is getting thinner.

[puzzlegal]

The Turks started out in ~Mongolia, should they, also, leave all the lands they conquered and return to their pre-Ghengis lands?

Heck, should the Turks give back the parts of Cyprus they conquered in 1974?

[Stratocaster]

That’s nobody’s business but the Turks’.

ETA: Sorry, couldn’t resist.

[kaylasdad99]

@InfraBlue

Most certainly.

“Necessary” i.e. essential, indispensable, or requisite. In regard to Israel, essential, indispensable, or requisite for its existence. “Oppressive,” i.e. tyrannical, unjustly harsh. “Oppress,” i.e. to keep down by severe and unjust use of force or authority. In regard to an oppressor, to subjugate by cruelty, force, etc. In regard to Israel, its treatment of the Palestinian people is tyrannical, with unjust use of force and authority in their subjugation of the Palestinian people as it denies the Palestinians’ rights in Palestine.

Thank you for your response. It seems fairly straightforward.

It also seems to invite a conclusion that it is impossible for a state to be known as Israel to. exist, without resulting in the oppressive displacement of one set of people. I find this punitive conclusion to be somewhat disquieting.

[InfraBlue]

@FinsToTheLeft

Not a red herring.

Let’s say a miracle happens and a single state solution with a peaceful democracy occurs. Do the Jews that were forced out of Muslim majority countries get to reclaim those lands and property stolen from them or no, because “it was Israel’s fault in the first place?”

Who are you quoting there?

No, you are engaging in whataboutism, which is a form of a tu-quoque fallacy, which is a subtype of ad-hominem argumentation.

[InfraBlue]

How is it disquieting?

Why should a necessarily oppressive state exist, let alone have a right to exist?