A far right politician in Israel does not represent the entire country, any more than Trump represents the entire U.S., much less so in fact since Israel is a very diverse multi-party democracy. The settlements are controversial, granted, but they are on barren land and in any event the Arabs simply don't accept any deal that's been offered over the decades. They have responded to every peace offering with horrific, murderous violence. They have no moral superiority. When people are deliberately killing babies and old women, it's very hard to sympathize with their cause. Under the circumstances, yes Israel is a bleeding heart and is doing its very best to restrain itself in the face of horrible provocations, and is very misunderstood by people who have little or no knowledge of the history and facts of the situation.
> When people are deliberately killing babies and old women, it's very hard to sympathize with their cause.
Right, and that's after you said "A far right politician in Israel does not represent the entire country".
> is very misunderstood by people who have little or no knowledge of the history and facts of the situation.
Notice how you didn't substantiate any of your claims, call the settlements "controversial" and seem to think that they are on "barren land" (right) would be relevant even if it was true, instead of a clear breach of Geneva conventions.
Even if you could justify an occupation, you cannot justify the settlements and the intention they represent, the deed that is being done, and trying to push that on "far right politicians" while treating Palestinians as a monolith, is just having a double standard.
I never claimed Palestinians have "moral superiority" and never would, because that's not how it works outside of sophistry. You don't work out who is worse, and then use them as a scapegoat for everything while absolving those who are "not the worst". Individual crimes do matter, and remain crimes even if the other party commits more. Which is not to be confused with "just because there are unsubstantiated claims the other party commits more", either. And all of that also applies to the "pro-Palestinians" who rage about how "the Zionists" are the worst, and how Israel is the worst. They peddle the exact same logic with roles reversed. "Don't criticize us, criticize them!"
The so-called occupation is a military administration begun after retreating Arab armies ceded the territories in 1967. This arrangement is legal and covered under international conventions. The U.S. did it in Japan and Germany for five years; the Soviet Union did it in eastern Europe for 45 years. The Chinese illegally occupied the vast lands of Tibet in 1950 and show no signs of letting go and the U.N. says nothing.
The Israelis withdrew from Gaza in 2005, forcibly removing the settlers, and were rewarded with 11,000 rockets. 11,000! They have every right to inspect cargo that enters Gaza; the Syrians and Iranians have long tried to import deadly weapons into that sorry land, and if they ever succeeded, Israel would have no choice but to reduce the place to rubble finally and completely and drive the Arabs from there back into Egypt which is where their ancestors came from 100-150 years previously.
As for "didn't substantiate any of your claims" for Pete's sake open up a newspaper once in a while. Two Jewish women in their 80s were just stabbed to death in Israel -- reports say they begged Arab workers nearby to call emergency services and the Arabs ignored them. Two elderly women in their eighties. Just today, probably while the above commenter was writing that stuff, there was a shooting attack in Tel Aviv, two Arab brothers from Hebron just opened up in a restaurant and killed four people and wounded several others before the police shot and wounded them. The Hamas leader, mistakenly believing one to be killed, called him a "hero". Just today. One of thousands of similar such incidents. Sophistry indeed. This is war, an ongoing and bitter war to drive the Jews out or kill them all. Israelis are totally justified and indeed should be doing a lot more.
> The Israelis withdrew from Gaza in 2005, forcibly removing the settlers, and were rewarded with 11,000 rockets
That wasn't because they removed the settlers, that's because they simply flat out withdrew.
> As for "didn't substantiate any of your claims" for Pete's sake open up a newspaper once in a while.
I know about the terrorist attacks, but that doesn't make the settlement land all "barren", it doesn't mean they "They have responded to every peace offering with horrific, murderous violence" -- it wasn't Palestinians who killed Rabin, you know -- and it doesn't fuse Palestinians into one monolith, something which you pointed out about Israelis but seem unable or unwilling to acknowledge here.
To what "peace offering" are the recent terrorist attacks a response? Who claimed they have "moral superiority", how is such a dichotomy be useful? Listing off instances of terrorism if I didn't know that, when I even said
> there's plenty of terrorism sold as "freedom fighting"
does not substantiate anything but one claim, one you didn't even make, namely "there is terrorism". I mean yeah, duh. My comment takes that into account from the get go. You claimed "there is terrorism in response to every peace offer", that's not the same thing.
> The so-called occupation is a military administration begun after retreating Arab armies ceded the territories in 1967. This arrangement is legal and covered under international conventions. The U.S. did it in Japan and Germany for five years; the Soviet Union did it in eastern Europe for 45 years.
Same here -- your point being? I know that, but since occupation can not forever, at least not as intention, and settlements are never okay, what I said is true now, where it's easy to justify occupation, and also when it might not be.
You can't talk peace while expanding settlements by force. Leibowitz was and remains right, it's just colonialism. And even if there is nobody to talk to atm, don't take what's not yours, and don't confuse self-defense and abuse. That goes for everybody at all times. I'm all for Israeli not taking shit, but to not see how driving out Palestinians also MUST be the intention of people who don't want them to have a state, that's just dishonest. To say "oh those are just far-right politicians, those don't count", isn't made up for with listing atrocities.
> Israelis are totally justified
With what, exactly? Just generally? Because they are "the victim"? I just explained why it doesn't work that way, if you want to dispute that, do so.
