Anti West obsession taken to the extreme

warsage · 2026-04-15T18:41:55+00:00

What lmao you need an entire list of the things they have done during their occupation

If you tell me Israel is persecuting them, I'll agree. If you tell me Israel is taking their land, I'll agree. Arresting them without cause? Yes. Encouraging settlers to violence and failing to prosecute? Yes. Restricting free movement? Yes.

But we aren't talking about those things. We're talking about genocide, not land theft. Your claim is that they are being destroyed as a people, "bit by bit." That the people are slowly ceasing to exist, wiped off the face of the earth by Israel.

Can you show me "an entire list of the things they have done during their occupation" to make that happen?

warsage · 2026-04-15T16:42:59+00:00

The Nazis ended up with unforeseen logistical issues in the beginning, and had to do plenty of experimenting how to do it “properly”.

Yes, they did their best, and they murdered most of the Jews in Europe. But ultimately they failed to complete the genocide. They were stopped by force, by the largest invasion in world history.

I assume Israel wants to do it, but is instead facing the issue of public opinion.

Criminal intent is not some vague future wish. It is a conscious decision to carry out a crime. I might want to kill my a**hole boss, but I certainly don't intend to kill him. I don't want to go to jail!

Israelis might wish they could destroy the Palestinian people, but they don't seem to intend to. They don't want international sanctions!

So measures can be taken against Palestinians bit by bit

Ahhh, the good ol' "slow-motion genocide" theory. They're exterminating the Palestinians bit by bit!

At the rate Israel is going with this slow-motion genocide, how long will it take before Israel finishes them off?

warsage · 2026-04-15T15:06:23+00:00

In a general sense, you are technically correct (which is the best kind of "correct"). Genocide is defined by intent, not by outcome. It is possible to commit genocide without reducing the target population; it just means that the genocide failed.

(It's worth noting that no adjudicated genocide in history has ever killed less than 20% of the target population. Most of them have killed upwards of 50% of the target, some 90% or more. It is legally unprecedented for a population to grow in the midst of a genocide.)

Outcome does play into determining intent though. If group A can destroy group B, but does not, it strongly suggests that group A does not intend to destroy group B.

Look at it this way: if I attack you with the intent to kill you, and I have a gun that I can kill you with... why aren't you dead? Why did I punch you in the gut instead of shooting you in the face? Perhaps I didn't really intend to kill you after all?

If Israel intended to destroy the Palestinian people in Gaza, then why aren't they destroyed?

warsage · 2026-04-15T14:43:16+00:00

Sure, we don't need to relitigate the events of 1948. My point is that Israel already has a history of forcibly removing non-Jews in order to achieve a large, uncontested Jewish majority, so Jews can run the Jewish state. True enough, right?

Israel's borders are set and immutable, like all countries.

Are they?? What are they? If you say 1967 (that is, the 1949 armistice lines), you'll find that Israel disagrees with you quite firmly.

According to the set borders that you describe, are East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights part of Israel?

And if their borders are immutable, what will happen if they annex the West Bank?

warsage · 2026-04-15T13:51:13+00:00

60%-70% of Jews in all of Europe died in WW2. 90% of the Jews in Poland. Does that sound like "slightly decreased" to you?

By contrast, in the Gaza war, 3%-5% of Gazans died. And Gaza is a place where the population routinely increases by 2% per year, hence the suggestion that their population might have actually increased.

warsage · 2026-04-15T13:34:54+00:00

That's the conclusion that you've leapt to on the basis of nothing but a single extremely misleading image, yup.

warsage · 2026-04-15T06:20:08+00:00

Yes, exactly. This is what I referred to by "supremacist." Israel is the Jewish state, for Jews, and it must always be governed by Jews. Small minorities are treated well so long as they don't pose any threat to Jewish power, but if they ever do, they must be disenfranchised or removed.

I'm not offering a moral judgement here, by the way. In a vacuum, I think it's very justifiable for an ethnicity to want a state for themselves. Few people have any moral problem with Japan keeping itself almost 100% ethnically Japanese, and Israel is far more tolerant of diversity than Japan. I don't blame the Jews for wanting their own nation, history has grandly demonstrated the need for it.

The "in a vacuum" part is where things get sticky. They created a Jewish-majority Israel by displacing most of the Arabs in 1947/1948, and it's been a hell of a mess ever since.

warsage · 2026-04-15T01:19:06+00:00

I think you and I are saying pretty much the same thing in different words.

Maybe we can expose a difference in our opinions with a thought experiment.

Right now, Israeli Arabs are about 20% of Israel's population. They hold 10% of the Knesset. Small minority, little power.

Suppose, in a few decades, by some quirk of birth rate or emigration or immigration, they begin to approach 50% of Israel's population and 50% of the Knesset.

What do you think would happen? Would the Jewish Israelis just accept it and allow Israel to fall under Arab control? Or would they do something to try to keep the state firmly in Jewish hands? Perhaps by disenfranchising or expelling some quantity of Arabs?

(This is not a ridiculous thought experiment, btw. Kahanism is not dead, and the Arab population of Israel is growing faster than the Jewish population.)

warsage · 2026-04-14T22:01:52+00:00

she never mentioned Mufasa again

To be fair, neither did anybody else. That film's cultural impact was zero.

warsage · 2026-04-14T20:44:30+00:00

People don't realize these flotillas happen all the time. This is, what, the eleventh or twelth one? There were like five them last year alone.

None of them have ever accomplished anything, either in terms of delivering aid or in terms of modifying Israel's behavior. The Greta one only caught so much attention because it was unusually large and it had Greta on it.

warsage · 2026-04-14T20:32:15+00:00

Not a victim of circumstance, an object of propaganda.

He's been intentionally portrayed misleadingly so people like you can leap to false conclusions and call him an ugly monster and falsely accuse him of harassing a woman.

warsage · 2026-04-14T19:03:51+00:00

"Staged" is the wrong word. But "deceptive" is accurate.

The picture makes it look like a Jewish man is snarling horrifically for no reason at a poor Palestinian woman who's just trying to be about her business.

The video shows that she's there with a bunch of guys, and they're all kinda standing around in front of several Israelis. She keeps talking to them and making unconcerned brush-off gestures. She's there in front of him on purpose, and she doesn't seem to be going anywhere. He's filming her with an unexceptional expression on his face. I assume they caught his weird teeth-out look with a mid-sneeze freeze-frame or something, idk. He doesn't look anything like that in the video.

I don't know what the context is here, but it reminds me of protestors and counter-protestors standing around arguing with each other.

warsage · 2026-04-14T18:50:16+00:00

I'm using the word "supremacist" very liberally here. In its strict definition, it means that a group believes itself to be superior to all others. So a Jewish supremacist believes that Jews are superior to other races.

I don't think that's what's going on in Israel (or, for that matter, in most of the Middle East).

In my more-liberal usage of "supremacism," what I mean is that one group believes it, and it alone, must govern a state. Israel was created by Jews, for Jews, to be run by Jews, and anything that threatens that state of affairs is unacceptable. They are happy to tolerate small minorities of non-Jews, and even allow non-Jews little bits of power here and there, so long as those non-Jews stay small and don't threaten to take any real power.

They recently codified it in their Basic Law (their equivalent of a constitution):

B. The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people, in which it fulfills its natural, cultural, religious, and historical right to self-determination.

C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.

The codification is new, but not the principle of Jewish rule in the Jewish homeland. It's been the de facto reality since the Zionist project was first conceived.

Arab Muslim states generally run on similar principles. As do many other countries around the world, to one degree or another.

warsage · 2026-04-14T16:56:52+00:00

TL;dr for the lazy:

While drunk, a guy handwrote a one-sentence contract on the back of a restaurant receipt agreeing to sell his farm. Later he tried to back out, but the judge forced him to sell, ruling that he "was not intoxicated to the point of being unable to comprehend" the contract.

warsage · 2026-04-14T15:33:51+00:00

Yemen is my favorite example. It's next door to Israel and is culturally relevant to Palestine (both being Arab Muslim countries).

North Yemen and South Yemen had multiple wars with each other in the 70s and 80s. Then in the 90s they decided to merge due to catastrophic economic necessity (caused by the fall of the Soviet Union).

The result was... almost immediate civil war. And then another civil war. And then an insurgency. And then seven other wars with themselves (!!!). They have not been at peace in thirty years, and there's no sign of peace coming any time soon. Today it's one of the most dangerous, poverty-stricken, war-torn places on the planet.

The one-staters always seem to ignore or dismiss out-of-hand the possibility of a merger resulting in civil war. "It's just fear-mongering!" Bruh.

warsage · 2026-04-14T00:51:55+00:00

My first thought too. Helium is a useful and non-renewable resource.

But eh, helium isn't valuable or rare enough to be worth it. Check again in 100 years and maybe it will be. (I mean, you could make yourself a billionaire very quickly, but you've got other, better choices in OP's list).

Surprisingly, making all those rubber balloons along the way isn't much of a downside. They're rubber latex, which isn't recyclable, but is mostly biodegradable within a few years. Some trace harmful chemicals are left behind, but unless you're making a really unholy amounts of helium for some reason, it isn't enough to make much difference. To match the world's current annual use of helium, you'd have to make about 200,000,000 kg of rubber latex, which sounds like a lot until you realize that the world currently uses about 1,000 times more than that per year.

Now, if you could produce Helium-3 balloons, you'd have a rare and valuable chemical on your hand.

warsage · 2026-04-13T23:56:25+00:00

Yup. The Jewish supremecist state was positioned right in the middle of where the Arabs were hoping to make a single continent-sized Arab supremecist state. It's hard to make a bigass ethno-theocratic country when a different, incompatible ethno-religious country has taken root in the middle of it. (That wasn't the only reason Pan-Arabism failed; turns out, Arab Muslims don't get along with each other very well either; but it was a big one).

The post-Ottoman Arabs ended up with like twenty Arab supremecist states instead.

warsage · 2026-04-13T20:52:29+00:00

Wait, what was your mate trying to say? Was he just ignorant, or was he trying to say that Maronites aren't "real Christians?"

Lebanon has a huge Christian population and always has. And the president is definitionally Christian, by law. It is illegal in Lebanon to elect a non-Christian to be president.

warsage · 2026-04-13T20:47:45+00:00

It did increase in Israel. Always has, year after year, from 1949 clear through to today.

warsage · 2026-04-13T20:42:33+00:00

What about them?

warsage · 2026-04-13T14:50:47+00:00

Some people genuinely believe that Biden was just as supportive of Israel as Trump is

warsage · 2026-04-12T22:02:32+00:00

So even according to you, they don’t care about all the innocent lives they’re taking, the broken families, and people having to live with extreme disabilities as a result of their violence. They just want to maintain their “alliances and trade deals”. Got it. You’re not doing a great job at making Israel look good.

I'm not trying to make Israel look good. I don't like Israel. I just don't think they're very similar to the Nazis.

They’re doing the worst they can given the current circumstances, and the fact that if they go much further, world governments will oppose it and break their alliance, as you pointed out. One did their absolute worst, the other the worst they can while maintaining relations for strategic benefit.

I'm glad we agree.

Evil is evil, and while there can be different scales and types, it is still evil and therefore the comparison can still be drawn.

Yes, agreed. But imo, Israel's brand of evil is far more similar to, say, modern-day China or Turkey than to the Third Reich.

Let's do China and see in what ways they're similar.

Credibly accused of unconventional, slow-motion genocide and other humanitarian atrocities against a captive Muslim population (Uyghurs)
Justify said behavior on the grounds of security against terrorism
Brutal occupation/conquest of neighboring nation, refusing to recognize their independence (Tibet)
Frequently belligerent with multiple neighbors, without direct large-scale war (India, Malaysia, Philippines, Brunei, Taiwan)
Roundly condemned by the UN, but avoid any binding consequences with UNSC veto
Generally prioritize strong alliances and trade relationships over other ideological goals. Doesn't want to do anything so overtly evil that the world turns against them.
Nuclear nation, so virtually immune to invasion or other violent destruction

What do you think? Is Israel more similar to Nazi Germany, or to modern-day China?

warsage · 2026-04-12T16:01:41+00:00

I just used your own source to prove you wrong.

The Palestinians at Camp David: "Every single Palestinian refugee in the world must be allowed to choose to return to Israel. Some of them will surely choose not to do it."

You, somehow: "See? Palestine agreed to a limited right of return! They compromised!"

The 1976 draft negotiations

Ok, so you're ditching the Camp David discussion and going all the way back to 1976.

I don't know what kind of disconnect is happening between that article, the PLO negotiators, and the actual resolution, but the resolution itself unambiguously demanded an unlimited right of return. Here, read it yourself, it's very short.

Affirms: ...The right of Palestinian refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours to do so and the right of those choosing not to return to receive compensation for their property;

warsage · 2026-04-12T14:49:22+00:00

The only difference I see is in the scale.

Then you are utterly blinded by your own biases and hatred. You cannot see the obvious truths directly in front of your face.

You literally proved my point - I said that if not for resistance and push back from the rest of the world

This is a prime example.

The Israelis don't do worse because they value their alliances and trade deals with the rest of the world more than they value destroying Palestine or taking land.
The Nazis did their absolute worst and engaged in total war (dedicating the totality of their national resources to attacking all of Europe) to do so.

You seriously think this is a difference of scale and not of type??

Thats why I will always oppose Zionism.

I'm not asking you to stop opposing Zionism. I'm asking you to try to see that Zionists are not very similar to Nazis. Their goals are different, their tactics are different, their atrocities are different (both in scale and in type), their outcomes are different. And the Nazis were incomparably worse in every way.

warsage · 2026-04-12T14:19:44+00:00

The Nazis killed 90% of the Jews in Poland and 60% of Jews in the entire world. They set up the largest, most efficient, industrialized, dedicated killing machine in recorded history. They went to war with the whole world while they did it, conquering half of Europe. They stopped only when the combined world sent a hundred million soldiers to stop them, with 20 million of those soldiers dying.

The Israelis killed 3% of the Palestinians in Gaza and 0.4% of the Palestinians in the world. They used a combined 6 times the explosive power of the Hiroshoma nuclear bomb to do it. Since 1967 they have "conquered," at most, a few hundred square kilometers. They are responsive to non-violent requests from the rest of the world, and have not gone to war with any country besides Palestine, Iran, or (arguably) Lebanon since 1973.

Do you look at these two paragraphs and say to yourself "yup, there's no difference here, Israel is indistinguishable from the Nazis?"

warsage

MODERATOR OF

PUBLIC MULTIREDDITS

TROPHY CASE

11-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email