Death to America
Libs get real offended if you just flatly say that Israel does not have a right to defend itself.
Yes, obviously, what Israel is now doing is in no way defensive but taking their dishonest framing and directly rejecting it is good too.
israel doesn’t even have the right to exist
No country has a right to exist
People have a right to exist
Countries do not.
After WWII the allies dismantled Nazi Germany and Japan because the whole world was like “you don’t get to exist.” Not like that anyway.
Zionist propagandists try to force the repetition of that line “Israel has a right to exist… Israel has a right to defend itself…” so that people never question it or rather can’t question it (they become children and start calling you names if you do). It’s just more bullshit and they always tie the state of Israel back to “the Jews” broadly, across the world. As if saying “Israel doesn’t have a right to exist” is the same as “Jews don’t have a right to exist.” Obviously it is not the same. Not even in the same realm. Like if I said Vatican City doesn’t have a right to exist no one would assume I meant “genocide all the Catholics!” I mean the entire thing is just moronic. Ethnostates are fucking bad.
Let’s be honest here: at least half of Nazi Germany didn’t get dismantled.
Denazification but only enough for plausible deniability
True true but you get the point
My absolute favorite is to hit them with even more religious bullshit. “As a devout Catholic I cannot deny Jesus of Nazareth is the rightful King of Israel and his kingdom will reign through the hearts of all; it transcends borders, language and culture. To acknowledge another Israel would be against the practice of the church.”
papistry
I’d stay away from using catholic doctrine to justify opposition to Zionism.
Like, the material is absolutely there, but that’s mainly because for the last thousand years it was the primary ideological basis for European antisemitism.
We hear you, we see you, but our hands are tied.
😔
Libs get real offended if you just flatly say that Israel does not have a right to defend itself.
liberal discourse about “rights” always misses the point anyway. Israel has always used the idea that it guarantees more “democratic rights” than the surrounding Arab states as evidence that it has
SVPERIOR CVLTVRE 
etc. etc.Israel has the power to defend itself. Where does it get that power? From the imperial core states (especially NATO/EU members) pouring money into it. Why do they do that? Because settler colonies are forward operating bases for imperial core capitalists. You can set up a situation where people have “equal rights” on paper, but in practice, violence decides what the actual material conditions are. Segregation in the united states always claimed to be “separate but equal” even as black people were made to suffer systemic discrimination (and continue to be made to suffer obviously)
Libs get real offended if you just flatly say that Israel does not have a right to defend itself.
Saw someone do this on Sky News of all places today lmao, interviewer didn’t know how to react.
good post
Libs get real offended if you just flatly say that Israel does not have a right to defend itself.
Well facts don’t care about your feelings, liberal
thinking about those videos of huge crowds of settlers at Ben Gurion queueing to flee to where their other passport is from
deleted by creator
my opinion about israel is the same as my opinion about the US
marg bar, as the kids say
The way our ghouls are behaving about this, it’s gonna be hard to say we don’t deserve whatever 
happens nextsend the green parts back to northwest eurasia
west eurasian peninsula dwellers be like:
Unlimited 9/11s on the first world
Unlimited 10/7s on the Zionist entity
Unlimited 1/6s on dork libs
It’s a fun thing to say, I’m sure. But it honestly upsets me to see others so willingly and happily wish death upon others. I don’t actually wish death on anyone, it’s just a sad and unfortunate necessity because oppressors like Israel and the US make it the only means of self-defence.
i agree the “1000 october 7s” aka 1.2 million dead people part is concerning me a bit, even if it’s hyperbole. like, we can recognize violence is often a necessary means to liberation without rooting for maximum violence?
It’s a cope. The necessary violence is really hard psychologically, people loop around to becoming hyperviolent as a way to deal with it.
It is and it isn’t. Do you think the Bolsheviks were wrong to kill children?
I think it’s sad that children died, but do you understand that children are going to die in every revolution? So some people, in order to cope with this, loop around to “fuck them kids, kill em all, unlimited genocide” etc etc
Oh I thought you meant people sarcastically say hyper violent things to cope. I agree.
Actually, I think it’s both. It’s sarcastic and also serious.
I think the royal family got owned and it was funny
I don’t really think it’s funny. Sure, the adults are funny, fuck them.
Alexei was hemophilic they didnt need to shoot him, they probably couldve just gave him a papercut and he wouldve died of exanguination
Seems more cruel.
I think it was a justified, necessary evil, but celebrating the death of any innocent life is pretty weird to me idk. like i’ll gladly celebrate the greater picture of what it brought an end to but the killing of a kid in it of itself?
Only reason the kids died is because the Tsar was using them as human shields.
Yeah that makes sense. I’ve seen some people support Hiroshima here in the past and that wan’t even necessary violence
i agree the “1000 october 7s” aka 1.2 million dead people
dead settlerslmfao incredible new emote
Yeah, comments like that just make liberal psychos feel more justified calling the left pro-hamas instead of pro-palestine. I don’t think it’s particularly productive.
Liberal psychos will always feel justified in everything they do.
Good point.
1.2 million dead idf shitheads would be unambiguously good
Death to America
I would far rather they see the error of their ways and leave the stolen land in peace
no more half measures walter
To me the true tragedy is if Mesopotamia and the Levant formed into one nation like the Arabs in the area wanted, we would have Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Palestine all as one nation. Even if 7 million Jews moved there, they would not be able to dominate their partitioned region. The colonial mandates of the late 19th century and early 20th century is what caused this violence, now we’re just going to live it out until the status quo can eventually change. May the communists win this century
It always goes back to the British
Sure Britain partitioned it all, but they’ve been gone since before 1950. Surely they could have immediately unpartitioned if that’s what they wanted, at a certain point it sounds like Trudeau blaming Mulroney
Removed by mod
TIL people can’t conceive of the idea all these Arabian countries have had 80 years to merge, if they desired.
It’s not as though the most powerful empire ever to exist (amerikkka) was actively destroying any movement that arose to accomplish this during the period you’ve mentioned. The CIA for instance openly admits to having coup’d Mossadegh (democratically elected by lib standards) after he dared to attempt to nationalize Iran’s oil. There are many other examples of the USA meddling in the region, for example the Iraq War which slaughtered a million people and which Biden voted for.
You’re 100% correct about what Amerikkka was doing with the CIA but Mossadegh is not the best specific example since that’s Iran, and Iran is not an Arab country. it is Muslim, but not Arab. They don’t speak Arabic, but Farsi. Iran is not considered part of the “Arab world” but it is considered part of the Middle East. These are often confused.Arab World (does not Include Iran)
Middle East (does include Iran)
Iran
Usually when people want to refer to the Arab World + Iran they say “MENA region” (Middle East North Africa)
I for one appreciate this lesson. I did not know this. Maybe vaguely. This is very clear, thanks.
Afghanistan does not appear in that middle east map, what region do we put Afghanistan in?
It’s more Central or South Asia
both South Asia and Central Asia
The Middle East is basically just West Asia (sometimes known as South-West Asia) minus Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Georgia and plus two transcontinental countries; Turkey (mostly in Asia except for East Thrace in Europe) and Egypt (mostly in Africa except for the Sinai Peninsula in Asia)
deleted by creator
Hearts of iron brained mf, just merge bro just click yes on the event pop up
I guess you’re right, the only possibility is that people like their post partition nation and national identities. There’s really no other explanation and no I won’t read any history to find out. Good thing the British came along and taught those foolish savages who they are.
Oh OK. So they don’t want to. So what was the point of blaming the English yet?
My reply to you was sarcastic. Of course theres much more to decolonization than redrawing lines on a map and the British are absolutely to blame for the longstanding effects of colonialism.
Why are you simping so hard for a country that fucked up half the world?
Removed by mod
Why is that enough time? It’s not as though North Ireland and Ireland are united. They’ve had plenty of time to figure out what they want to do.
Because, unlike Ireland, England isn’t enforcing this anymore, and hasn’t in forever
I don’t think that’s quite right. From what you said, if I understand, the enforcement, and recency are the determining factors? Nothing of justice or fairness? I suppose any atrocity or action is fine as long as the people who were alive at the time (we’ll ignore their descendants whose lives are obviously affected) are dead and gone for a few decades.
Why is 80 years enough? Where did you even get that number? I figure you started off with “this is ok”, then looked at how much time passed, then declared it was “enough”.
You’re not even responding to what I actually wrote anymore.
They tried. Pan-Arabism was a massive movement, especially under Nasser. It was opposed by America, western Europe, Israel, the Arab monarchies, and later on, the Islamic extremist movements these nations armed and funded in secular Arab nations.
Oh fuck off. Obviously Israel would still be there, but I meant the other countries
Tough talk from a nerd like you
Removed by mod
I’m taking bets on which slur it was. Any takers?
I got 8 XiBux saying it was removed
I got 5 on removed
They tried, Pan-Arabism was popular in the 50s with Nasser and his UAR with Syria. The Americans were worried that Pan-Arab Republic would be Soviet-aligned though so they provided significant support to Islamist parties like the Muslim Brotherhood to divide the Arab world
following the 1952 military revolution in Egypt and rise to power of the charismatic President Gamal Abdel Nasser, U.S. officials began to fear an Egyptian rapprochement with the Soviet Union. This led the U.S. to reconsider the Muslim Brotherhood, which came to be described in official cables not as fanatics, but as “orthodox believers.”
Subsequently, regular meetings were held at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo between the American Chargé d’affaires Frank Gaffney and the General Guide of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hassan al-Hudaybi. By the mid-1950s, when relations between the Ikhwan and Egypt’s military rulers collapsed after an initial period of cooperation, the U.S.’s engagement with the Brotherhood came to be seen increasingly by American diplomats as a possible opportunity to pressure the Soviet-aligned military government in Cairo.
The US also provoked Gadaffi overthrow for the same reason: worried about socialist influence and threat of Arab unity. So they had him brutally executed by islamist rebels. Similar situation in Afghanistan with Osama bin ladin and the socialist government there, though that one came with some serious blowback. These are just a few examples, I urge you to research more about American imperialism in the Middle East, because the United States has played a very major role in the region since the end of the second world war.
idk why I don’t hear anybody saying this but “from the river to the sea” is compatible with a one state solution of reintegration a la South Africa. Yes there will be internal violence. Yes the settlers will run and hide in gated communities within gated communities. Yes it will take over 100 years to become something resembling a normal country.
You’re cute for thinking that the solution for Israel will be as mild as it was for South Africa. The settlers will be removed and that won’t be pretty, they cannot exist peacefully with the Palestinians they treated as subhuman for more than 80 fucking years, it’s worse than South Africa, Apartheid pales in comparison to what’s happening in Palestine, Palestine is the equivalent of an open air concentration camp. And after that the Americans are next on the chopping block in terms of decolonial struggle and they will probably get nuked if I’m making predictions here. The future is going to be violent, as communists we can only assume world war three is inevitable and we should take individual action to insulate ourselves from the literal fallout. Comrades, I have a bunker full of beans, if you ask nicely, you can have them.
it’s worse than South Africa, Apartheid pales in comparison to what’s happening in Palestine, Palestine is the equivalent of an open air concentration camp
Fully agree this is far more extreme than South Africa, plus South Africa was <15% white, while a one state Palestine would be around 50% Jewish (and far more Palestinians than Israelis are under 18). Imo, the ideal coexistence would be administered by an eastern/global southern power, but however it’s brought about, you’d need to abolish the current fascist “law of return” and give the Palestinian diaspora (over 6 million people, mostly in Jordan and Syria) right of return, reparations, etc.
Obviously deport all first generation settlers (>20% of Israel’s current population) back to America and Europe, but it gets more complicated for a lot of people born there, and wouldn’t really solve much imo. For one, roughly half or more of Israeli Jews are Arab Jews/Mizrahi (which would surprise some people seeing how white their government is). This is largely because, 1) intermarriage between Ashkenazis and Mizrahis has become common (if one of your parents are Ashkenazi and another Mizrahi, you’re just considered Mizrahi), and 2) immigration, coercion, and kidnapping of Arab Jews from other countries was a big thing.
Mizrahis are indigenous to the Middle East, but they’ve essentially had their culture stolen and been forcibly assimilated. So “deporting all settlers” wouldn’t solve much and would be pretty complicated to define. While Mizrahis aren’t settlers, they’ve been indoctrinated their entire lives in the same way Ashkenazi Israelis are, and even attempt to prove themselves to the settlers by being even more fascist in a lot of cases. So unfortunately, any resistance and violence from settlers would be equally if not more likely from indigenous Mizrahis either way.
As sick and fascist as the Zionist entity is, I don’t think South Africa style reintegration is a pipe dream. You have a lot of examples in history of this, look at reconciliation after the Rwandan genocide for one.
Forced deportations is unfeasable and frankly even talking about it makes us look bad. In a single, democratic Palestinian state a lot of settlers would leave of their own accord anyway.
South Africa is definitely the model that should be aspired to, however a two state solution is probably required as an intermediate step because Israeli’s are incredibly unhinged, in contrast to the rest of the Western world their young generation is actually more right wing than their boomers (75% of 18-35 year olds self identify as right wing).
Apartheid ended in South Africa because it became unviable in the long term. As well as the internal resistance on one hand, you had the country under sanctions and with an understanding that it would not be permitted to simply genocide the black population. This is the key difference with Israel - it’s importance to US imperialism, in contrast to South Africa which was not useful to the US, means that it has unlimited American backing. Thus, it has the green light to commit genocide, and the state is actually viable even in the long term.
With the Arab states other than Iran, Lebanon and Yemen having totally abandoned Palestine, a two state solution is realistically the most that can be achieved at this time. However a two state solution that leaves Palestine under the economic and military thumb of Israel, and under the dictatorship of corrupt Israeli hirelings (ie the Palestinian Authority) cannot be acceptable either.
Of course, if the US abandoned Israel or declined in power then there would be many other possibilitiesWhile it doesn’t matter at all here, any Westerners talking about 1000 Oct 7’s in the real world would be being wilfully counterproductive
Removed by mod
Why are you ranting about Jews in general and not Israelis specifically? Why are you advocating the deportation of Jews from America? That’s just nazi shit.
They joined 10 days ago
that comment wasn’t just removeworthy, it was ban worthy. Weird this user is still with us. Talking about deporting Jews from the USA…
if your opinion about israel is anything other than “death to israel, infinite october 7s on the settlers until palestine is free from the river to the sea”, fuck you, your bloodline, and all your dead homies
This is a centrist position
I thought ‘bloodline’ implied enough relatives to qualify for an acceptable party line
From every river to every sea Palestine will be free
From the Nile to the Pacific
Two things I hate are colonialism and the influence of American Evangelical eschatology on geopolitics. Guess where both overlap
From the river to the sea!
Bring back downvotes because jesus christ, this thread isn’t doing anything except wasting anima into terminally online , self-righteous navel gazing. Listen OP, I have had to grapple and coming to terms with America massacring millions of my people but signing every one of your posts and comments with “death to America” regardless of how just it might be in intent or how you mean it, simply comes across as provocatively inflammatory and trying to get rise out of others. If someone acted like you posted, I’d think they were a fed, or they were a late teen channelling some other source of repent energy into this. Its a red flag either way, and I’m not sure at all what it does. No Palestinians or Middle Easterners I know have the opinion you quoted, even as aggrieved as they are.
nah it’s not really that deep. i just fuckin hate america
Death to America
Imagine choosing “Death to America” as the thing to get upset about. Fuck you.
Death to America
Do you think I’ve never said or agreed with a “Death to America”? No, I think that encouraging a million dead israelis as the only acceptable opinion and saying fuck you to anyone who disagrees is extremely online, needs to touch grass behaviour. This isn’t “dirtbag left” shit, its literally just immature and annoying lol. I left my “saying fuck you a lot” behaviour behind in my early teenage years. Fuck you. Are we saying that along all our struggle sessions? Come on now.
deleted by creator
what if i said 1001? what then?
We try not to reach with those numbers because the we don’t know whether spaghetti code will overflow if we somehow hit negatives. A few million settlers are bad enough, who’s going to deal with septillions of them?
Seriously, we’ve got neither Stalin nor Mao to kill gojillions by eating their grain or killing birds. We can’t mess up like this.
hmm yes that makes sense. i apologize for my ignorance!
With proper geo fencing a few septillion could work nicely
