Schumer and the 2 state solution ELI5

[Deleted member 6736302]

Are rape, murder and kidnapping legitimate tools of political protest?

I notice you led with rape, which, given the current furore over the legitimacy of the New York Times article on which the Israeli accusations appear to be based, is perhaps indicative of the agenda you operate under (i.e. make the Hamas attack look as bad as possible regardless of evidence).

The below article showcases this explicitly:

https://www.yesmagazine.org/social-justice/2024/03/05/israel-hamas-oct7-report-gaza

So let’s say, for argument’s sake, that your question is rhetorical. Is rape a legitimate tool of political protest? Obviously not, and I would not, do not condone it, in any sphere of global protest.

So, is murder and kidnapping legitimate tools of political protest?

Well, if you define Israel as the occupying nation (as the entire role outside of Israel does, even if you don’t also recognise the Palestinian state), then yes - under international law, violent protest and fighting back is allowed.

Morally, do I personally condone either? Obviously not, I abhor killing and hostage killing.

I would prefer to negotiate between parties.

But that requires the state with all the power, in the first instance, to stop their abusive, repressive, apartheid and genocidal actions.

And so we are back to asking what is a legitimate form of resistance, when all other political instruments available are exhausted.

So I hope that clarifies my position for you.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

I notice you led with rape, which, given the current furore over the legitimacy of the New York Times article on which the Israeli accusations appear to be based, is perhaps indicative of the agenda you operate under (i.e. make the Hamas attack look as bad as possible regardless of evidence).

The below article showcases this explicitly:

https://www.yesmagazine.org/social-justice/2024/03/05/israel-hamas-oct7-report-gaza

So let’s say, for argument’s sake, that your question is rhetorical. Is rape a legitimate tool of political protest? Obviously not, and I would not, do not condone it, in any sphere of global protest.

So, is murder and kidnapping legitimate tools of political protest?

Well, if you define Israel as the occupying nation (as the entire role outside of Israel does, even if you don’t also recognise the Palestinian state), then yes - under international law, violent protest and fighting back is allowed.

Morally, do I personally condone either? Obviously not, I abhor killing and hostage killing.

I would prefer to negotiate between parties.

But that requires the state with all the power, in the first instance, to stop their abusive, repressive, apartheid and genocidal actions.

And so we are back to asking what is a legitimate form of resistance, when all other political instruments available are exhausted.

So I hope that clarifies my position for you.

Hamas did not exhaust all other options. Six months ago they used rape, murder, and kidnapping as political tools, counting on the international community to defend them.

 

[Deleted member 6736302]

Hamas did not exhaust all other options. Six months ago they used rape, murder, and kidnapping as political tools, counting on the international community to defend them.

This is why you are a bad faith actor in this thread (maybe on this forum) and why it is fruitless discussing this any further with you.

You have repeated the rape claim, which is now under intense international scrutiny.

You have claimed they did not exhaust all other options. What options did they have outside of this? Name them? I challenge you to name the options available to Hamas and Gaza in the face of Israel.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

This is why you are a bad faith actor in this thread (maybe on this forum) and why it is fruitless discussing this any further with you.

You have repeated the rape claim, which is now under intense international scrutiny.

You have claimed they did not exhaust all other options. What options did they have outside of this? Name them? I challenge you to name the options available to Hamas and Gaza in the face of Israel.

Stop the rocket attacks and negotiate a two-state solution. Hamas would help the cause of peace a lot if they abandoned the idea of killing all the Jews and destroying the Jewish homeland.

 

[Deleted member 6736302]

Stop the rocket attacks and negotiate a two-state solution. Hamas would help the cause of peace a lot if they abandoned the idea of killing all the Jews and destroying the Jewish homeland.

Bad faith acting again. You’re not possible to have a reasoned debate with.

Hamas didn’t exist until 2006. Israel has been imprisoning people without charge and killing Palestinians, and moving them off their land for decades before, all the way back to 1948.

The two state solution is something the Israeli government has repeatedly said they do not want. They have taken over Palestinian land repeatedly and killed Palestinians repeatedly to take it. Do you deny this?

You keep putting the idea out of “killing all the Jews and destroying the Jewish homeland” as if that is current policy, today, in 2024. Look around the news. Look at Gaza. Who is destroying who?

Your claims of self defence do not, and never have held, scrutiny.

You have an iron dome system that keeps out 99% of the rockets. Gaza had no such system. Should they have done, to protect themselves from Israel?

Do Palestinians have the “right to self defence” against the violent settlers in Israel?

Your “right to self defence” has turned into “right to commit genocide”.

Do you deny the damage Israel’s govt and military have caused for the last 75 years?

 

[ll74]

Bad faith acting again. You’re not possible to have a reasoned debate with.

Hamas didn’t exist until 2006. Israel has been imprisoning people without charge and killing Palestinians, and moving them off their land for decades before, all the way back to 1948.

The two state solution is something the Israeli government has repeatedly said they do not want. They have taken over Palestinian land repeatedly and killed Palestinians repeatedly to take it. Do you deny this?

You keep putting the idea out of “killing all the Jews and destroying the Jewish homeland” as if that is current policy, today, in 2024. Look around the news. Look at Gaza. Who is destroying who?

Your claims of self defence do not, and never have held, scrutiny.

You have an iron dome system that keeps out 99% of the rockets. Gaza had no such system. Should they have done, to protect themselves from Israel?

Do Palestinians have the “right to self defence” against the violent settlers in Israel?

Your “right to self defence” has turned into “right to commit genocide”.

Do you deny the damage Israel’s govt and military have caused for the last 75 years?

So the bottom line here seems to be that you support the Hamas attack on October 7.

 

[Deleted member 6736302]

So the bottom line here seems to be that you support the Hamas attack on October 7.

No, read my posts this morning again.

We can condemn their attack, we can disagree vehemently with the nature of the attack, we can also understand where it has developed out of that.

That accusation you’ve made is yet another example of bad faith acting on this thread.

Anyone thinking October 7 happened in a vacuum is part of the problem.

Hamas’ attack I absolutely condemn and abhor.

But I was not surprised by it given the immediate history prior to 7 October nor the 75 years preceding it.

 

[ll74]

No, read my posts this morning again.

We can condemn their attack, we can disagree vehemently with the nature of the attack, we can also understand where it has developed out of that.

That accusation you’ve made is yet another example of bad faith acting on this thread.

Anyone thinking October 7 happened in a vacuum is part of the problem.

Hamas’ attack I absolutely condemn and abhor.

But I was not surprised by it given the immediate history prior to 7 October nor the 75 years preceding it.

I don't care what you think you've said, but saying "they had to defend themselves." Is saying exactly that.

 

[Deleted member 6736302]

I don't care what you think you've said, but saying "they had to defend themselves." Is saying exactly that.

That’s not what I said. Try reading it again without trying to do your utmost to be a bad faith actor

Think critically. If you spend 75 years confiscating land, confiscating possessions, killing and subjugating a population, are you really surprised when groups you would deem terrorist groups start to pop up and attack you?

Was October 7 an act of terror? Yes, of course it was.

Was Hamas’ motivation rooted in the Palestinian’s cause? I think there’s experts out there that would also point to more aggressive, extreme ideologies too but you cannot deny a link between 7 October and how the Palestinians have been treated by Israel for 75 years.

And the point I am making (which you are refusing to see, because it’s easier for you to call me a Hamas sympathiser, than think critically) is that there is an obvious double standard being applied here.

Israel apparently has the right of defence against Hamas. If we agree with that principle, then the follow up question has to be asked, do Palestinians have the right of defence against Israel? Or have they had the right of defence against Israel?

Because, as was outlined in the ICJ case by South Africa, YES, Palestinians have the right to defence as Israel is the occupying power, under international law.

That includes violent protest.

Maybe step back and think critically about what’s being argued and said before jumping to the ludicrous “You must be a Hamas sympathiser” line of reasoning (which I am not).

What I am saying, and I will bold this for your understanding, is that I don’t agree with or support Hamas’ actions, but I understand the conditions under which such actions occurred.

Perhaps it’s better phrased as a question - if you are a people who has been subjugated, killed, maimed and displaced for decades, do you give up or do you fight back?

If it was YOU personally affected by an occupying power, what would YOU do?

This isn’t trying to condone Hamas’ actions but pointing towards understanding why things happen. Which is different.

I hope that’s clearer?

 

[ll74]

That’s not what I said. Try reading it again without trying to do your utmost to be a bad faith actor

Think critically. If you spend 75 years confiscating land, confiscating possessions, killing and subjugating a population, are you really surprised when groups you would deem terrorist groups start to pop up and attack you?

Was October 7 an act of terror? Yes, of course it was.

Was Hamas’ motivation rooted in the Palestinian’s cause? I think there’s experts out there that would also point to more aggressive, extreme ideologies too but you cannot deny a link between 7 October and how the Palestinians have been treated by Israel for 75 years.

And the point I am making (which you are refusing to see, because it’s easier for you to call me a Hamas sympathiser, than think critically) is that there is an obvious double standard being applied here.

Israel apparently has the right of defence against Hamas. If we agree with that principle, then the follow up question has to be asked, do Palestinians have the right of defence against Israel? Or have they had the right of defence against Israel?

Because, as was outlined in the ICJ case by South Africa, YES, Palestinians have the right to defence as Israel is the occupying power, under international law.

That includes violent protest.

Maybe step back and think critically about what’s being argued and said before jumping to the ludicrous “You must be a Hamas sympathiser” line of reasoning (which I am not).

What I am saying, and I will bold this for your understanding, is that I don’t agree with or support Hamas’ actions, but I understand the conditions under which such actions occurred.

Perhaps it’s better phrased as a question - if you are a people who has been subjugated, killed, maimed and displaced for decades, do you give up or do you fight back?

If it was YOU personally affected by an occupying power, what would YOU do?

This isn’t trying to condone Hamas’ actions but pointing towards understanding why things happen. Which is different.

I hope that’s clearer?

You aren't changing what I said. What I find humorous, is that you say I can call you a sympathizer (I didn't) and then the rest of your post sympathizes with Hamas.

I don't give a shit why people initiate wars. Hamas shouldn't have attacked.

 

[Deleted member 6736302]

You aren't changing what I said. What I find humorous, is that you say I can call you a sympathizer (I didn't) and then the rest of your post sympathizes with Hamas.

I don't give a shit why people initiate wars. Hamas shouldn't have attacked.

I think you need to do a lot more reading about apartheid states and terrorism, in all honesty.

I’ve condemned Hamas repeatedly in this thread and others.

Understanding why things happen is as important as declaring that they should not have happened.

I presume that if I now agree that Hamas should not have attacked on 7 October 2023, you would also if I ask, agree with my statement that Israel should not have killed over 250 people, including children, in the West Bank by 6 October 2023 in the same year?

Your double standard is noted, of course.

Israelis have the right to defence and bomb the Palestinians into oblivion, the Palestinians do not have any right to any kind of defence when it goes the other way.

Some might call that an obvious racist double standard.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

Bad faith acting again. You’re not possible to have a reasoned debate with.

Hamas didn’t exist until 2006. Israel has been imprisoning people without charge and killing Palestinians, and moving them off their land for decades before, all the way back to 1948.

The two state solution is something the Israeli government has repeatedly said they do not want. They have taken over Palestinian land repeatedly and killed Palestinians repeatedly to take it. Do you deny this?

You keep putting the idea out of “killing all the Jews and destroying the Jewish homeland” as if that is current policy, today, in 2024. Look around the news. Look at Gaza. Who is destroying who?

Your claims of self defence do not, and never have held, scrutiny.

You have an iron dome system that keeps out 99% of the rockets. Gaza had no such system. Should they have done, to protect themselves from Israel?

Do Palestinians have the “right to self defence” against the violent settlers in Israel?

Your “right to self defence” has turned into “right to commit genocide”.

Do you deny the damage Israel’s govt and military have caused for the last 75 years?

Does the “right to violent protest” justify Munich ‘72? How is October 7th any different?

 

[Deleted member 6736302]

Does the “right to violent protest” justify Munich ‘72? How is October 7th any different?

Palestinians would also point you in the direction of the various massacres that have occurred since the 1948 Nakba.

This is the point though, you want it all one way. Either both have the right of defence, or neither do. Either both have committed atrocities, or neither have in defence of themselves.

The ICJ case submitted by South Africa paints a different picture. One of an occupying power repeatedly committing apartheid and crimes against humanity, and pointing to international humanitarian law as being broken, repeatedly.

It is entirely possible (and probably the correct position) to condemn Hamas’ actions on 7 October 2023 and then to condemn Israel’s actions before, and after, 7 October 2023 as an occupying power.

But understanding how Hamas developed, why they developed, and under what circumstances we find ourselves, points towards where we can resolve this.

Which, ultimately, given Israel has literally all of the power over Gaza and the West Bank, ends with a ceasefire and a return of all political hostages, and an end to the violent, apartheid settler movement, and Israel entering into negotiations with all of the Palestinian factions to create a genuinely safe, negotiated state of Palestine alongside Israel.

Continuing to quote October 7 as a means to commit acts of genocide against 2.3 million people will not, and is not, washing with the international community.

On your own head be it.

 

[ll74]

I think you need to do a lot more reading about apartheid states and terrorism, in all honesty.

Yes, you seem to believe that.

I’ve condemned Hamas repeatedly in this thread and others.

Your last thread basically explained why their attack was warranted.

Understanding why things happen is as important as declaring that they should not have happened.

You have a lot of words, for sure.

I presume that if I now agree that Hamas should not have attacked on 7 October 2023, you would also if I ask, agree with my statement that Israel should not have killed over 250 people, including children, in the West Bank by 6 October 2023 in the same year?

Your position is extremely one sided.

Your double standard is noted, of course.

Israelis have the right to defence and bomb the Palestinians into oblivion, the Palestinians do not have any right to any kind of defence when it goes the other way.

I don't support attacks on civilians, full stop.

Some might call that an obvious racist double standard.

Lol, of course.

 

[HisArpy]

I haven’t missed any point. I’m not, nor have ever been talking about, January 6th.

If you want to go and talk about them, go do it on another thread. I have no interest in responding further to you.

THE POINT, for those who are too invested in playing stupid in public, is that you can't mouth off about freeing Israeli prisoners while also not demanding that other political prisoners be freed.

You know, like those picked up for their J6 involvement...

 

[Deleted member 6736302]

Yes, you seem to believe that.


Your last thread basically explained why their attack was warranted.


You have a lot of words, for sure.


Your position is extreme one sided.


I don't support attacks on civilians, full stop.


Lol, of course.

You haven’t presented any reasonable rebuttal to my post other than more bad faith acting, so for myself, I am going to bow out of this thread.

With regards to this being one sided - it absolutely is one sided. One is the fourth largest army in the world, the other is a small nation of around 7 million people total in two of the most densely packed areas in the world, being literally blockaded and killed by said country and army.

May I humbly suggest that you do some reading on the whole history of the conflict, rather than just the pro Israeli side of it?

My final words for this thread - ceasefire now, release the hostages, no attack on Rafah, let the aid in, end the violent settler movement, go into the negotiation of all negotiations and end the apartheid state and make peace.

 

[HisArpy]

Does the “right to violent protest” justify Munich ‘72? How is October 7th any different?

Fair warning; The Summer Olympics this year in France will more than likely have a similar event.

 

[ll74]

You haven’t presented any reasonable rebuttal to my post other than more bad faith acting, so for myself, I am going to bow out of this thread.

You're a broken record. Throw down an essay about your position for five posts, then publicly declare that you're "out" because of the other guy.

It's quite entertaining and reminds me of TrailerHitch.

In the end, I don't care what you're arguing. I want a pathway to peace. I want civilian deaths minimized. Accusations and blame don't really advance that cause much... Nor does trying to understand motivations of a terrorist attack

With regards to this being one sided - it absolutely is one sided. One is the fourth largest army in the world, the other is a small nation of around 7 million people total in two of the most densely packed areas in the world, being literally blockaded and killed by said country and army.

I support a temporary cease fire with additional efforts to push for a two state solution.

As I said in my previous post - I am against killing of civilians. Full stop.

May I humbly suggest that you do some reading on the whole history of the conflict, rather than just the pro Israeli side of it?

I understand historical context, which has led to this war. My thread is a bunch of people explaining it over and over and over again. My position isn't dependent on history.

My final words for this thread - ceasefire now, release the hostages, no attack on Rafah, let the aid in, end the violent settler movement, go into the negotiation of all negotiations and end the apartheid state and make peace.

Your ego is fun to watch on display. I'm sure that will earn me another "bad faith actor" award.

 

[Cloudyjackie]

Recently Sen Schumer made a speech that, among other things, called for a 2 state solution to the Palestine problem. Both Israel and Gaza/West Bank would be sovereign states. What does this purport to solve?

Some of us are old enough to recall world war 2, where a sovereign nation (Japan) attacked a sovereign nation (USA). This gave USA casus belli to declare war on Japan. In the war, the USA pounded the everloving shit out of Japan and remade them in our own image.

If Gaza/West Bank had been a sovereign nation, and attacked Israel ala 7 October, Israel would have casus belli to declare war on Gaza/West Bank. Seems like a sub-optimal solution for the terrorist apologists.

What is the 2 state solution expected to provide?

2 state solution has never been accepted by what ever terrorist was representing Iran at the time. Palestinians leaders will never except a 2 state deal, Iran won’t, Muslims won’t. Muslims won’t be happy till Jews are extinguished from face of earth. If that happens, it won’t matter what anybody thinks.

 

[Buffalogurl]

These middle eastern people have been killing each other for centuries, no matter what is purposed they'll remain butt hurt and continue to slaughter one another.... all I care about is keeping my people, my soldiers, my country away from their shit storm..... I've reached a point in time that I am just sick of my people coming home in bodybags.....not our monkey, not our circus......

 

[ll74]

These middle eastern people have been killing each other for centuries, no matter what is purposed they'll remain butt hurt and continue to slaughter one another.... all I care about is keeping my people, my soldiers, my country away from their shit storm..... I've reached a point in time that I am just sick of my people coming home in bodybags.....not our monkey, not our circus......

"These people ...."

 

[LLCox]

Neither Israel OR Hamass want a 2State solution. You heard it here first.

 

[Philthy_Phil]

Sure bub.



Meanwhile back in reality, Israel has agreed to signed peace agreements with Palestine. Agreements which Palestine repeatedly violates.

Israel has stopped Israeli settlements in Gaza and required that settlers abandon the lands they attempted to seize.

Israel allows Gazans to become Israeli citizens if they apply.

Israel allows Gaza to trade with Egypt through the gate into Egypt.

Israel allows Gaza to self govern.

Meanwhile, Gaza signs peace agreements while simultaneously launching rockets at Israeli civilians in concert with Hezbollah in the North.

Keep drinking the Kool aid, rapey