The Biden administration last week put a hold on a shipment of U.S.-made ammunition to Israel, two Israeli officials told Axios.
Why it matters: It is the first time since the Oct. 7 attack that the U.S. has stopped a weapons shipment intended for the Israeli military. The incident raised serious concerns inside the Israeli government and sent officials scrambling to understand why the shipment was held, Israeli officials said. President Biden is facing sharp criticism among Americans who oppose his support of Israel. The administration in February asked Israel to provide assurances that U.S.-made weapons were being used by Israel Defense Forces in Gaza in accordance with international law. Israel provided a signed letter of assurances in March.
The trick here, that was even covered in that paper, is the difference between what Palestinians think a one state solution is and what Israelis think a one state solution is.
In that study they found the Palestinians viewed a single country with equal rights for all as a one state solution. The Israelis thought it meant a state with all of the territory but without the Palestinians.
Frankly, the liberal Israelis wouldn’t be for a one state solution if it also meant giving up the land and property stolen from the Palestinians through terrorism.
“Scratch a liberal, and a fascist bleeds”
Watch how fast they’d turn right wing if property in west Jerusalem or east Jerusalem had to be given up.
Where do you see the point about Israelis believing it would be without Palestinians? I’ve read it twice now, and I don’t see that understanding anywhere. Did you make that up?
Figure 2 and figure 4 on page 7 and 8.
My description is definitely hyperbole, but it’s still stretching the truth less then your ‘leftist Jewish people really do want as a majority this thing that the study shows as single digit, or just barely double digit at 10%.’ thing.
also, leftists don’t want things stolen through terror.
This really reads as a cope study for American Jewish people that don’t want to deal with the cognitive dissonance that the internal contradictions of leftism and Zionism automatically produces.
There is no ethical way to create a new homeland for a people that underwent a diaspora that is ethical when the land they want is already occupied.
Edit: plus it won’t matter as long as the state of Israel has a law requiring Jewish Israelis maintain the majority population. Oh yeah, that’s a thing.
Edit: this is done on a phone and I’m correcting autocorrect mistakes that don’t change the point.
Those are the two state solution graphs, and that would be without Palestinian representation. It’s less, only 20% of Israeli Jews and almost all Arab/Palestinian Israelis support an equal one state solution. That still makes up almost half of the left wing party. The numbers have been steadily increasing as older generations die. I have Israeli-American friends that have supported one-state their whole life growing up in Israel. They don’t dehumanize or vilify Palestinians. They have nothing but contempt for Hamas and their bloodthirsty agenda to eradicate Israeli settlers and reclaim the holy land, but are very aware of the difference between Hamas and Palestinians. They want peace and equality, as do many others in the left wing.
Do they have the same contempt for Israeli IDF that intentionally kill civilians in Gaza or give cover to the hilltop youth committing ethnic cleansing in the west bank and demand the 15000 Palestinian hostages from the west bank be released? If not, they’re hypocrites at best.
I have Israeli-American friends that are organizing their cities JVP chapter.
Israel is not an ethical creation, and my father is older than this so called country.
Oh 100%. One of them joined the protest in NYC. They both resent Netanyahu for using antisemitism as a defense for his actions. They’re both Israeli Jews, and have to deal with the repercussions of his actions halfway around the world.
As far as the ethics of creating Israel, that was decided by Truman and the UN. The US is more to blame for the creation of Israel than the Israelis.
Tell that to the fucking Irgun.
Israel was formed through terrorism and maintains its power through terrorism, as all colonial states do. That word, colonial? That was the word Israel used to describe itself in the 50’s to Europe when trying to convince other Jewish people to move there and take land from the people living there.
Israel was formed by the Zionists who formed it through terrorism and ethnic cleansing. Truman, dumb fuck that he was, just formalized what existed through the targeted violence lead by the Zionists living there at the time.
That’s not accurate. The US saw the creation of Israel as a way to establish US presence against the colonial support of Great Britain and the Soviet support of the USSR in the Palestinian Arabs. The US provided the forces for “containment” as it was called. The Jewish settlers did not have the means to do what was done, having just been displaced from Germany and Poland.
https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1047&context=history_etds
Do you just post links hoping people won’t read them and they’ll be like ‘oh shit, this person is posting sources!’
A thesis for a masters degree in history in 1980(EDIT: 1990, not 1980) at Old Dominion university a source is not.
Especially for something as ahistorical as your point of view. Especially for trying to absolve the Zionists of any agency or responsibility for their actions. Truman and the international community voted and approved the partition plan. David Ben Gurion and other Jewish leaders in Zionist terrorist organizations like the Irgun and Lehi under the Haganah used it as a stepping stone to enlarge their territory through forced ethnic cleansing and murder sprees.
I don’t know how to even respond to this it’s so nonsensical. All I can imagine is it’s an attempt to link in the Holocaust with the formation of Israel. As if the influx of Zionists to Mandatory Palestine started in 1945. If that was the case, Zionists should have just been given Austria or something.
It’s clear at this point you’re either arguing in bad faith or just so delusional as to be living in an alternate universe.
I will actually give you the benefit of the doubt here in the bad faith bit here though. You don’t seem malicious, you seem like you believe your own nonsense.
Either way, I’m done with this.
Edit: Sorry, the 1990, not 1980.
Those are not two state solutions graphs.
Do you actually read those? Those are graphs for what people want if a two state solution is available in the set of options in the study.
That twenty percent figure comes from if you remove all other possible options.
This its an example of ‘lies, damned lies, and statistics’ except as usual, it’s not the statistics doing the lying but the person misinterpreting them.
Edit: while I don’t think the author of this it’s biased, I think the methodology of the study is shitty. Not maliciously so, just it’s really hard to build studies that get to peoples underlying views.