Skip to content
0
  • Home
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
  • Home
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Sketchy)
  • No Skin
Collapse

Wandering Adventure Party

  1. Home
  2. Canada
  3. Mark Carney calls for a 'Zionist' Palestine (yeah, he actually did)

Mark Carney calls for a 'Zionist' Palestine (yeah, he actually did)

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Canada
canada
149 Posts 27 Posters 5 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • spacecowboy@lemmy.caS spacecowboy@lemmy.ca

    Violence isn’t working out well for Palestinians. Maybe it’s time to start accepting Israel is going to continue to exist, trying to make it not exist is just getting a lot of people killed.

    L This user is from outside of this forum
    L This user is from outside of this forum
    leftytighty@slrpnk.net
    wrote last edited by
    #119

    If the United States occupied most of Ontario’s territory and displaced Canadians to do so, then it continued to exert control over the rest of Canada and gradually demolished Canadian homes to build American homes, then it started allowing American civilians to terrorize, murder, and loot Canadian towns, and so on… Would you say Canadians need to just chill out and enthusiastically support the US?

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
    • V vincentadultman@lemmy.zip

      Nuance?! On social media??? Off with his head!!

      C This user is from outside of this forum
      C This user is from outside of this forum
      canadaplus@lemmy.sdf.org
      wrote last edited by canadaplus@lemmy.sdf.org
      #120

      People do seem to come to social media to be affirmed regardless of whatever the truth is. That’s inevitably a road to ruin, though. Ditto for the people that come looking for conflict.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • L leftytighty@slrpnk.net

        Very charitable but valid interpretation.

        Extremely poor choice of a loaded word if so.

        Either way, reason to be disappointed with him.

        C This user is from outside of this forum
        C This user is from outside of this forum
        canadaplus@lemmy.sdf.org
        wrote last edited by canadaplus@lemmy.sdf.org
        #121

        That’s where “when from” becomes significant as well. The political calculus around Zionism was pretty different 10 years ago - being anti-Zionist was basically a fringe ideology in the West, and in the mainstream was conflated with being anti-Jewish.

        Saying “Zionism” but interpreting it as a two-state solution was kind of a moderate-left take on things.

        L 1 Reply Last reply
        2
        • spacecowboy@lemmy.caS spacecowboy@lemmy.ca

          It was pointless to imagine France and England would ever put aside their differences… until they did. It was pointless to imagine France and Germany putting aside their differences… until they did. I remember when I was young people said The Troubles would never end. I was told the war in Yugoslavia would go on forever.

          People can put aside their differences. There is a Palestinian movement in Gaza that wants peace. Israel in the past has tried to make land for peace deals, but guys like Yasser Arafat fucked it up.

          There is a willingness for peace on both sides, it’s just the leadership needs to change.

          C This user is from outside of this forum
          C This user is from outside of this forum
          canadaplus@lemmy.sdf.org
          wrote last edited by
          #122

          Israel in the past has tried to make land for peace deals, but guys like Yasser Arafat fucked it up.

          I mean, some of the current Israeli cabinet assassinated a prime minister to scuttle a peace deal. Let’s not pretend one side has had worse faith than another continuously over many generations, because that’s fairly impossible.

          W 1 Reply Last reply
          1
          • spacecowboy@lemmy.caS spacecowboy@lemmy.ca

            Violence isn’t working out well for Palestinians. Maybe it’s time to start accepting Israel is going to continue to exist, trying to make it not exist is just getting a lot of people killed.

            C This user is from outside of this forum
            C This user is from outside of this forum
            canadaplus@lemmy.sdf.org
            wrote last edited by canadaplus@lemmy.sdf.org
            #123

            Nonviolence has yielded even less fruit.

            In actuality, they’re like cattle in a slaughterhouse as long as the US supports Israel the way it does. There is no right way to act.

            1 Reply Last reply
            3
            • spacecowboy@lemmy.caS spacecowboy@lemmy.ca

              “A Zionist (if you will) Palestinian State that recognizes the right of Israel to exist. Not just to exist but to prosper and not live in fear.”

              So he just means a state that doesn’t want to wipe Israel off the map. He may not be aware that “Zionist” is a trigger word in far left information bubbles.

              C This user is from outside of this forum
              C This user is from outside of this forum
              canadaplus@lemmy.sdf.org
              wrote last edited by
              #124

              That’s where the “when” comes up as well. 10 years ago the narrative about Zionism in the West was different.

              1 Reply Last reply
              2
              • A arkouda@lemmy.ca

                Reading this again, I see you’re not a Zionist but just a person interested in nuance and the actual truth here. That’s good, the source is doing the thing where you cut out a soundbite and make rage bait out of it.

                Thank you for understanding where I am coming from.

                So what’s the solution here? Both sides are human, and will harbour grudges and gravitate to ideologies that legitimise them. Peace has been imposed under similar situations before.

                I think possible solutions get far more complicated the longer everything is allowed to go on.

                If I was given the power of decision I would have international boots on the ground, disarm all parties and security would be the responsibility of the international third parties, every single person who committed a crime must be brought before the courts and charged from all sides of this, an extensive deprogramming and education program to de-radicalize the populations, at which point each side will be given the ability to set up their own systems of government and be given more freedoms from the international community regarding personal defense as each state demonstrates its good faith in moving into the international community and following international law. Both states will be recognized by the international community at large, and I believe it is the responsibility of all Governments involved to fund reparations for the civilians who have been impacted or displaced, as well as a right to return for every single person.

                Now I know this is an incredibly tall, and even seemingly impossible order. At the end of the day this is the only way I see lasting peace when considering the long and bloody history of this conflict. As you pointed out peace has been imposed before and not lasted, but I think a big mistake is it wasn’t done correctly because it did not address those deep wounds and scars within the communities, or the radicalization present in the populations.

                C This user is from outside of this forum
                C This user is from outside of this forum
                canadaplus@lemmy.sdf.org
                wrote last edited by canadaplus@lemmy.sdf.org
                #125

                So that’s kind of the Yugoslavia solution, right? I’d agree, that would do the trick, but I’d like to point out there’s still pockets of Serbians that think what they did was cool. Putting the onus on one side of the current conflict - and the far less powerful side - to smarten up beforehand seems unfair. That’s how your initial comment read.

                I’m actually pretty hopeful about the feasibility of ending the cycle. Human history is full of ethnic conflicts, and especially recent human history is full of the sides maintaining an uneasy peace afterwards. People might hate, but they want to live in safety far more; this specific conflict is still ongoing because one side has been empowered to do both.

                A 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • C canadaplus@lemmy.sdf.org

                  So that’s kind of the Yugoslavia solution, right? I’d agree, that would do the trick, but I’d like to point out there’s still pockets of Serbians that think what they did was cool. Putting the onus on one side of the current conflict - and the far less powerful side - to smarten up beforehand seems unfair. That’s how your initial comment read.

                  I’m actually pretty hopeful about the feasibility of ending the cycle. Human history is full of ethnic conflicts, and especially recent human history is full of the sides maintaining an uneasy peace afterwards. People might hate, but they want to live in safety far more; this specific conflict is still ongoing because one side has been empowered to do both.

                  A This user is from outside of this forum
                  A This user is from outside of this forum
                  arkouda@lemmy.ca
                  wrote last edited by
                  #126

                  So that’s kind of the Yugoslavia solution, right? I’d agree, that would do the trick, but I’d like to point out there’s still pockets of Serbians that think what they did was cool. Putting the onus on one side of the current conflict - and the far less powerful side - to smarten up beforehand seems unfair. That’s how your initial comment read.

                  In a sense it is similar, I am not as familiar with that situation. That is always a major issue after extended ethnic conflicts unfortunately. I can see how my initial comment could be interpreted that way only when taken out of the context of the conversation “There is issues on the Palestinian side of the conflict that need to be resolved for lasting peace”.

                  I’m actually pretty hopeful about the feasibility of ending the cycle. Human history is full of ethnic conflicts, and especially recent human history is full of the sides maintaining an uneasy peace afterwards. People might hate, but they want to live in safety far more; this specific conflict is still ongoing because one side has been empowered to do both.

                  I am hopeful as well, especially considering the history of conflicts like these maintaining that uneasy peace you brought up. Hopefully the greater international community will step in and do what needs to be done before it is too late to resolve the situation.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  1
                  • L leftytighty@slrpnk.net

                    Very charitable but valid interpretation.

                    Extremely poor choice of a loaded word if so.

                    Either way, reason to be disappointed with him.

                    J This user is from outside of this forum
                    J This user is from outside of this forum
                    jsomae@lemmy.ml
                    wrote last edited by jsomae@lemmy.ml
                    #127

                    Seems to me like it’s a good way of trying to make the idea of a free palestine appeal to zionists.

                    (This is my best attempt at apologism.)

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    1
                    • C canadaplus@lemmy.sdf.org

                      That’s where “when from” becomes significant as well. The political calculus around Zionism was pretty different 10 years ago - being anti-Zionist was basically a fringe ideology in the West, and in the mainstream was conflated with being anti-Jewish.

                      Saying “Zionism” but interpreting it as a two-state solution was kind of a moderate-left take on things.

                      L This user is from outside of this forum
                      L This user is from outside of this forum
                      leftytighty@slrpnk.net
                      wrote last edited by
                      #128

                      That’s valid, for the record these are recent comments.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • spacecowboy@lemmy.caS spacecowboy@lemmy.ca

                        Because the world isn’t fair, and this isn’t a sport.

                        In a fair world there would a nuclear exchange killing millions on both sides. Is that what you want?

                        L This user is from outside of this forum
                        L This user is from outside of this forum
                        leftytighty@slrpnk.net
                        wrote last edited by
                        #129

                        Perhaps if Israel committed to giving up its nukes, withdrawing its illegal settlements, and giving Palestinians civilian trials instead of military trials, the Arab world would be open to cooperation

                        spacecowboy@lemmy.caS 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • L leftytighty@slrpnk.net

                          Perhaps if Israel committed to giving up its nukes, withdrawing its illegal settlements, and giving Palestinians civilian trials instead of military trials, the Arab world would be open to cooperation

                          spacecowboy@lemmy.caS This user is from outside of this forum
                          spacecowboy@lemmy.caS This user is from outside of this forum
                          spacecowboy@lemmy.ca
                          wrote last edited by
                          #130

                          How about we start with the Arab world (and Iran too… they’re not actually Arabic) just recognizing Israel exists? Telling a country they don’t need weapons while also having no respect for their country existing probably isn’t going to do anything.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • C canadaplus@lemmy.sdf.org

                            Israel in the past has tried to make land for peace deals, but guys like Yasser Arafat fucked it up.

                            I mean, some of the current Israeli cabinet assassinated a prime minister to scuttle a peace deal. Let’s not pretend one side has had worse faith than another continuously over many generations, because that’s fairly impossible.

                            W This user is from outside of this forum
                            W This user is from outside of this forum
                            wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works
                            wrote last edited by
                            #131

                            Mind you that peace deal was HEAVILY biased against the current aggressor, for the most part it was another stalling tactic. But even that wasn’t enough for the Zionist overtone window. For example the Oslo accord prevented the PLA from managing its own water.

                            Link Preview Image
                            Water under the bridge: how the Oslo agreement robbed the Palestinians

                            Ian Black: 'Cooperation' with Israel over West Bank water supplies helped consolidate illegal settlements and undermine the two-state solution, a new study shows.

                            favicon

                            the Guardian (www.theguardian.com)

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • A arkouda@lemmy.ca

                              Why do other ethnic and religious groups exist in modern day Israel if they were all supposed to be expelled or exterminated?

                              W This user is from outside of this forum
                              W This user is from outside of this forum
                              wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works
                              wrote last edited by
                              #132

                              You’re mosfeaming the question…why do they exist under a different set of laws? Why do they have different IDs, even license plates? Sure they exist… But they absolutely do not exist in a state of equal rights.

                              A 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • A arkouda@lemmy.ca

                                International Law.

                                W This user is from outside of this forum
                                W This user is from outside of this forum
                                wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works
                                wrote last edited by wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works
                                #133

                                It’s interesting you would make this point, since there is no right to for a given state to exist in international law. There’s a right to self determination. But that is not the same thing.

                                A 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • W wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works

                                  It’s interesting you would make this point, since there is no right to for a given state to exist in international law. There’s a right to self determination. But that is not the same thing.

                                  A This user is from outside of this forum
                                  A This user is from outside of this forum
                                  arkouda@lemmy.ca
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #134

                                  It’s interesting you would make this point, since there is no right to for a given state to exist in international law. There’s a right to self determination. But that is not the same thing.

                                  Considering it is International law that grants the states existence in the first place, I would say that is a moot point.

                                  W 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • W wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works

                                    You’re mosfeaming the question…why do they exist under a different set of laws? Why do they have different IDs, even license plates? Sure they exist… But they absolutely do not exist in a state of equal rights.

                                    A This user is from outside of this forum
                                    A This user is from outside of this forum
                                    arkouda@lemmy.ca
                                    wrote last edited by
                                    #135

                                    Your disregarding the point.

                                    W 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • A arkouda@lemmy.ca

                                      Your disregarding the point.

                                      W This user is from outside of this forum
                                      W This user is from outside of this forum
                                      wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works
                                      wrote last edited by
                                      #136

                                      No I think the question of why Israel is an apartheid state is indeed the point.

                                      A 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • A arkouda@lemmy.ca

                                        It’s interesting you would make this point, since there is no right to for a given state to exist in international law. There’s a right to self determination. But that is not the same thing.

                                        Considering it is International law that grants the states existence in the first place, I would say that is a moot point.

                                        W This user is from outside of this forum
                                        W This user is from outside of this forum
                                        wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works
                                        wrote last edited by wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works
                                        #137

                                        That’s just not true. State exists or they don’t de facto. Self determination applies to people, not states. States have a right to territorial integrity, aka not getting attacked, but that’s it.

                                        A 1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • W wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works

                                          No I think the question of why Israel is an apartheid state is indeed the point.

                                          A This user is from outside of this forum
                                          A This user is from outside of this forum
                                          arkouda@lemmy.ca
                                          wrote last edited by
                                          #138

                                          Zionism is a fascist ideology based upon building an ethno nation states wherein those of other ethnicities are expelled or exterminated.

                                          Why do other ethnic and religious groups exist in modern day Israel if they were all supposed to be expelled or exterminated?

                                          Not arguing against the fact that Israel doesn’t have equal rights for everyone. Arguing against the other person assertion that everyone was expelled or exterminated.

                                          W 1 Reply Last reply
                                          0

                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                                          • First post
                                            Last post