By your logic your tantamount to a zionist because you cannot demonstrate how isreal will ever be deconstructed other then by force, death, destruction.
That’s idiotic. I support deconstructing Israel through force, therefore, I am clearly not a Zionist. You do not support deconstructing Israel at all, therefore, you are a Zionist. This is very straightforward logic.
D-day the allied forces attacked a genocidal expansionist state beginning the liberation of France. Who are the allied forces that will liberate palistine?
The same sort of coalition of the willing. The previous Nazis were so bad they got Churchill and Stalin fighting on the same team.
Right now, Hamas, Ansarallah, and Iran seem like the Zionazis’ biggest opponents. Hopefully, in time, more will join in opposition.
South Africa was liberated through civil disobedience. That is the South African model.
You’re treating tactics for achieving a policy as inseparable from the policy itself, which they’re obviously not.
I prefer likely solutions that can be executed without large human tolls. That and generations long projects that methodically deconstruct oppressive societies and replaces oppression with liberty.
Pick one. Because if the Zionist entity is allowed to continue existing for the duration of a “generations long project,” then there will, necessarily, be “large human tolls,” like, virtually every Gazan, if not every Palestinian.
What would’ve happened if, instead of directly confronting and abolishing the Nazi state through force, people had followed your advice of waiting for a “generations long project” to effect change? How many more millions would’ve died?
Justice delayed is justice denied. The longer you kick the can down the road, the longer Israel gets to continue with it’s genocidal aims freely.
Zionists, they believe in deconstructing palistine by force. Am I wrong, what is it youre really against zionism or Jewish zionism?
Hamas, Ansarallah, and Iran are not liberarors.
South Africa made policy possible through strategy. You’re just looking to extend the tit for tat.
You can use the nazi example as a general analogy. It does not translate to a 1:1 anology. Nazi Germany was not being propped up by an imperialist america.
Zionists, they believe in deconstructing palistine by force. Am I wrong, what is it youre really against zionism or Jewish zionism?
Wtf would “non-Jewish Zionism” even be? This is utterly incoherent, your definitions are completely wrong.
Zionism means supporting the continued existence of a Jewish ethnostate in occupied Palestine. In practice, this means supporting the genocide of Palestinians because that’s what the vast majority of Israelis want. But it does not definitionally require supporting further aggression against Palestinians.
Hamas, Ansarallah, and Iran are not liberarors.
Maybe not, but they are literally the only check against Israel’s genocide, currently.
Would you say that Stalin was a liberator, btw? Because either way, he sure did a lot to stop the Nazis.
South Africa made policy possible through strategy.
This is meaningless nonsense, you’re just stringing words together.
You cant tell me my definition of zionism is wrong then tell me your made up definition of zionism is right.
The South African people used civil disobedience to change the laws of their government and end apartheid. You’re saying isreals government need be destroyed. South Africans did not trash their government, they change it.
You cant tell me my definition of zionism is wrong then tell me your made up definition of zionism is right.
Lmao, my definition of Zionism is not “made up.” Here’s what came up when I googled “Zionism definition:”
Zionism is a political movement that supports the self-determination and statehood for the Jewish people in their ancestral homeland, the land of Israel. It encompasses both the historical desire for a Jewish homeland and the modern-day efforts to develop and sustain the State of Israel.
Fucking dumbass, maybe learn basic terms and facts about the situation before trying to weigh in with your ignorant drivel.
Simply put, Zionism is a movement to recreate a Jewish presence in Israel. The name comes from the word “Zion,” which is a Hebrew term that refers to Jerusalem.
Throughout history, Jews have considered certain areas in Israel sacred—as do Christians and Muslims. The Torah, the Jewish religious text, depicts stories of ancient prophets who were instructed by their God to return to this homeland.
While the fundamental philosophies of the Zionist movement have existed for hundreds of years, modern Zionism formally took root in the late 19th century. Around that time, Jews throughout the world faced growing anti-Semitism.
Some historians believe that an increasingly tense atmosphere between Jews and Europeans may have triggered the Zionism movement. In one 1894 incident, a Jewish officer in the French army named Alfred Dreyfus was falsely accused and convicted of treason. This event, which became known as the “Dreyfus Affair,” sparked outrage among Jewish people and many others.
Persecuted Jews who were struggling to salvage their identity began promoting the idea of returning to their homeland and restoring a Jewish culture there.
You realize that still supports my definition and not yours, right? Where in that definition does it say anything about killing Palestinians, as you assert is part of what Zionism is defined by?
What’s the point of telling you to investigate if when you investigate and find proof that you’re wrong, you simply keep asserting that the evidence proves you right? Maybe you should just stop speaking entirely, at that point.
Im just demonstrating “zionism” didnt become “zionism” until the jews acted on their belief that they had a claim to some land. Just as the Palestinians believe they have a claim to some land, religious or otherwise. Some guy deemed the Jewish zionism “zionism” from some other meaning just as a Palestinian “zionism” could be claimed.
What does it even matter, youre now arguing that zionism could exist with out the displacement or death of the Palestinian people. How is that wrong in a region strictly inhabited by other ethnostates? Hell, you even argue Iran, an ethnostate, is justified in attacking isreal!
Im just demonstrating “zionism” didnt become “zionism” until the jews acted on their belief that they had a claim to some land. Just as the Palestinians believe they have a claim to some land, religious or otherwise. Some guy deemed the Jewish zionism “zionism” from some other meaning just as a Palestinian “zionism” could be claimed.
This is utterly insane. That’s not what the word means, at all. Zionism isn’t “anytime someone has a claim to some land,” JFC.
What does it even matter, youre now arguing that zionism could exist with out the displacement or death of the Palestinian people.
Wrong. I’m arguing that the death of displacement of Palestinians is not part of the definition of Zionism. In practice, that is what it entails. Learn to read.
How is that wrong in a region strictly inhabited by other ethnostates? Hell, you even argue Iran, an ethnostate, is justified in attacking isreal.
Iran is not an ethnostate, nor is it committing genocide, and it’s “attacks” are retaliation for Israel’s unprovoked aggression.
I’m not interested in discussing this further with you until you either educate yourself and can actually defend your views from an informed position, or until you stop trying to attack my views from a position of complete and utter ignorance, where you say such nonsense as “Zionism is whenever anyone claims any land.”
When you have not probed into a problem, into the present facts and its past history, and know nothing of its essentials, whatever you say about it will undoubtedly be nonsense.
That’s idiotic. I support deconstructing Israel through force, therefore, I am clearly not a Zionist. You do not support deconstructing Israel at all, therefore, you are a Zionist. This is very straightforward logic.
The same sort of coalition of the willing. The previous Nazis were so bad they got Churchill and Stalin fighting on the same team.
Right now, Hamas, Ansarallah, and Iran seem like the Zionazis’ biggest opponents. Hopefully, in time, more will join in opposition.
You’re treating tactics for achieving a policy as inseparable from the policy itself, which they’re obviously not.
Pick one. Because if the Zionist entity is allowed to continue existing for the duration of a “generations long project,” then there will, necessarily, be “large human tolls,” like, virtually every Gazan, if not every Palestinian.
What would’ve happened if, instead of directly confronting and abolishing the Nazi state through force, people had followed your advice of waiting for a “generations long project” to effect change? How many more millions would’ve died?
Justice delayed is justice denied. The longer you kick the can down the road, the longer Israel gets to continue with it’s genocidal aims freely.
Zionists, they believe in deconstructing palistine by force. Am I wrong, what is it youre really against zionism or Jewish zionism?
Hamas, Ansarallah, and Iran are not liberarors.
South Africa made policy possible through strategy. You’re just looking to extend the tit for tat.
You can use the nazi example as a general analogy. It does not translate to a 1:1 anology. Nazi Germany was not being propped up by an imperialist america.
Wtf would “non-Jewish Zionism” even be? This is utterly incoherent, your definitions are completely wrong.
Zionism means supporting the continued existence of a Jewish ethnostate in occupied Palestine. In practice, this means supporting the genocide of Palestinians because that’s what the vast majority of Israelis want. But it does not definitionally require supporting further aggression against Palestinians.
Maybe not, but they are literally the only check against Israel’s genocide, currently.
Would you say that Stalin was a liberator, btw? Because either way, he sure did a lot to stop the Nazis.
This is meaningless nonsense, you’re just stringing words together.
You cant tell me my definition of zionism is wrong then tell me your made up definition of zionism is right.
The South African people used civil disobedience to change the laws of their government and end apartheid. You’re saying isreals government need be destroyed. South Africans did not trash their government, they change it.
Lmao, my definition of Zionism is not “made up.” Here’s what came up when I googled “Zionism definition:”
Fucking dumbass, maybe learn basic terms and facts about the situation before trying to weigh in with your ignorant drivel.
No investigation, no right to speak.
Let’s keep this going.
Simply put, Zionism is a movement to recreate a Jewish presence in Israel. The name comes from the word “Zion,” which is a Hebrew term that refers to Jerusalem.
Throughout history, Jews have considered certain areas in Israel sacred—as do Christians and Muslims. The Torah, the Jewish religious text, depicts stories of ancient prophets who were instructed by their God to return to this homeland.
While the fundamental philosophies of the Zionist movement have existed for hundreds of years, modern Zionism formally took root in the late 19th century. Around that time, Jews throughout the world faced growing anti-Semitism.
Some historians believe that an increasingly tense atmosphere between Jews and Europeans may have triggered the Zionism movement. In one 1894 incident, a Jewish officer in the French army named Alfred Dreyfus was falsely accused and convicted of treason. This event, which became known as the “Dreyfus Affair,” sparked outrage among Jewish people and many others.
Persecuted Jews who were struggling to salvage their identity began promoting the idea of returning to their homeland and restoring a Jewish culture there.
https://www.history.com/articles/zionism
You realize that still supports my definition and not yours, right? Where in that definition does it say anything about killing Palestinians, as you assert is part of what Zionism is defined by?
What’s the point of telling you to investigate if when you investigate and find proof that you’re wrong, you simply keep asserting that the evidence proves you right? Maybe you should just stop speaking entirely, at that point.
Im just demonstrating “zionism” didnt become “zionism” until the jews acted on their belief that they had a claim to some land. Just as the Palestinians believe they have a claim to some land, religious or otherwise. Some guy deemed the Jewish zionism “zionism” from some other meaning just as a Palestinian “zionism” could be claimed.
What does it even matter, youre now arguing that zionism could exist with out the displacement or death of the Palestinian people. How is that wrong in a region strictly inhabited by other ethnostates? Hell, you even argue Iran, an ethnostate, is justified in attacking isreal!
This is utterly insane. That’s not what the word means, at all. Zionism isn’t “anytime someone has a claim to some land,” JFC.
Wrong. I’m arguing that the death of displacement of Palestinians is not part of the definition of Zionism. In practice, that is what it entails. Learn to read.
Iran is not an ethnostate, nor is it committing genocide, and it’s “attacks” are retaliation for Israel’s unprovoked aggression.
I’m not interested in discussing this further with you until you either educate yourself and can actually defend your views from an informed position, or until you stop trying to attack my views from a position of complete and utter ignorance, where you say such nonsense as “Zionism is whenever anyone claims any land.”