After the 6 Day War in 1967, when Israel attacked 3 of its neighboring countries,
Am a noob in this but, going by Wikipedia, only Egypt was attacked and that was after they blocked Israeli shipping in the South. Syria and Jordan attacked in solidarity with Egypt.
Re 1948, yes it does seem deliberately misleading by the table to leave it out, I acknowledge that.
Re the current war: it started off as legitimate retaliation although in retrospect I think it was futile. Israel should have sucked it up and fixed their lax border patrol.
If Israel wanted to ethnically cleanse they could have been more efficient but that would have turned the world against them. The mission creep (whether intended or not) suited Likud.
Unfortunately I hear that even a change of government in Israel would not change the current trajectory. Other nations withholding arms/funding is essential now but this call was hobbled at the start by not even acknowledging the horror of Oct 7 (at least in a call for a ceasefire presented to the Australian Parliament). Israel was called genocidal from the outset, before they even retaliated. That did not help and would have lost support for the resolution from the Left in Israel.
If Israel wanted to ethnically cleanse they could have been more efficient
This argument keeps getting thrown around, as though doing "onlysome" ethnic cleansing is not still ethnic cleansing or something. China could also exterminate all Uyghurs in Xinjiang at once if they wanted, but that doesn’t make their genocide of Uyghurs any less of a genocide either. Israeli government officials have said in plain terms that they think Palestinians should be moved to the Sinai desert or that other nations should let them take refuge (from Israel) in their states. That is literally advocating ethnic cleansing.
The Sinai option is recent. At this point in time semantics don’t matter. I agree it is ethnic cleansing now. This is what you get when two right wing groups fight.
The excuse of stopping another Oct 7 is weak. A competent government would not have let it happen in the first place. Preventing a repeat would not be difficult. Eliminating Hamas is fantasy as is eliminating the state of Israel.
It would help if the global Left would drop the inflammatory “river to the sea” mantra and instead concentrate on a 2SS.
Point is: hypocrisy does not help conflict resolution.
The global Left refusing to call that genocide (even inventing conspiracies about IDF killing its own people on the day) helped escalate it. It made even moderate Israelis cheer on the retribution which ended up wildly disproportionate and counterproductive.
You seem stuck on seeing any criticism of the Palestinian side as unbridled support for Likud’s agenda.
Am a noob in this but, going by Wikipedia, only Egypt was attacked and that was after they blocked Israeli shipping in the South. Syria and Jordan attacked in solidarity with Egypt.
Re 1948, yes it does seem deliberately misleading by the table to leave it out, I acknowledge that.
Re the current war: it started off as legitimate retaliation although in retrospect I think it was futile. Israel should have sucked it up and fixed their lax border patrol.
If Israel wanted to ethnically cleanse they could have been more efficient but that would have turned the world against them. The mission creep (whether intended or not) suited Likud.
Unfortunately I hear that even a change of government in Israel would not change the current trajectory. Other nations withholding arms/funding is essential now but this call was hobbled at the start by not even acknowledging the horror of Oct 7 (at least in a call for a ceasefire presented to the Australian Parliament). Israel was called genocidal from the outset, before they even retaliated. That did not help and would have lost support for the resolution from the Left in Israel.
The resolution notably does not specifically condemn Hamas for the Oct. 7 terrorist attack — nor does it mention Hamas by name at all — a line the U.S. had said was necessary… The resolution also doesn’t affirm Israel’s right to self-defense or mention rocket attacks by Hamas and other militant groups on Israel.
This argument keeps getting thrown around, as though doing "only some" ethnic cleansing is not still ethnic cleansing or something. China could also exterminate all Uyghurs in Xinjiang at once if they wanted, but that doesn’t make their genocide of Uyghurs any less of a genocide either. Israeli government officials have said in plain terms that they think Palestinians should be moved to the Sinai desert or that other nations should let them take refuge (from Israel) in their states. That is literally advocating ethnic cleansing.
The Sinai option is recent. At this point in time semantics don’t matter. I agree it is ethnic cleansing now. This is what you get when two right wing groups fight.
The excuse of stopping another Oct 7 is weak. A competent government would not have let it happen in the first place. Preventing a repeat would not be difficult. Eliminating Hamas is fantasy as is eliminating the state of Israel.
It would help if the global Left would drop the inflammatory “river to the sea” mantra and instead concentrate on a 2SS.
Oct 7 was also “some ethnic cleansing”. Hamas didn’t even pretend otherwise.
Sure. But what’s your point? Are you saying that makes it more okay for Israel to do it to Palestinians? Otherwise, it just seems like ‘whataboutism’.
Point is: hypocrisy does not help conflict resolution.
The global Left refusing to call that genocide (even inventing conspiracies about IDF killing its own people on the day) helped escalate it. It made even moderate Israelis cheer on the retribution which ended up wildly disproportionate and counterproductive.
You seem stuck on seeing any criticism of the Palestinian side as unbridled support for Likud’s agenda.