Former Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon, when asked to explain the apparent about-face that led him to advocate the unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, quoted a beloved Israeli pop ballad. “What you can see from there, you can’t see from here,” he said, referring to the shift in perspective he had supposedly undergone since coming to power.
Israeli-born Holocaust historian Omer Bartov invoked the same line when he was asked how he had come to view Israel’s ferocious assault on Gaza as a genocide. Living in the US, where he has spent more than three decades, he said, had given him the necessary distance to see the annihilation of Gaza for what it was. “I think it’s very hard to be dispassionate when you’re there,” he said.
Bartov did more than simply apply the word genocide to Israel’s actions: he shouted it from the establishment-media rooftops, making the case in a lengthy July 2025 essay in the New York Times titled: I’m a Genocide Scholar. I Know It When I See It. (He had addressed some of the arguments in a Guardian essay the year prior.) Bartov’s declaration cost him several close relationships, he told me, even though subsequent events have not only validated his analysis but further demonstrated the lack of concern for Palestinian suffering that has become prevalent in Israeli society.
His new book, Israel: What Went Wrong?, is an attempt to explain that indifference. The book, which was published on Tuesday, is a detailed account of how Israel was transformed from a hopeful nation that in its founding document promised “complete equality of social and political rights to all its citizens irrespective of religion, race or sex” into one intent on what he bluntly terms “settler colonialism and ethno-nationalism”.
It is working as expected. Herzl was advocating for displacing the local people to create the state
Israel was an insane ethnostate movement long before they even gained independence. There’s a reason why an overwhelming majority of former colonial states criticized Israel’s existence during its very inception.
Had the Zionist movement never taken off, Mandatory Palestine would probably have just become a regular old state like Lebanon or Jordan, Lebanon even has a pretty hefty Christian population right after Muslims, yet you don’t see them in some constant genocidal warfare campaign against each other.
Even weirder, Judaism itself was against the idea of forming a Jewish state without a Messiah for thousands of years, but at some point the radical branch became the overwhelming majority. Orthodox Jews are completely outnumbered by their Zionist counterparts which have transformed Judaism into a complete ethnic superiority cult akin to the Aryan superiority of the Nazis. You have to be born a Jew, you can’t just join because you want to (unless you dedicate your entire life into it, and still with caveats).
You’ll see thousands of comments like “Anti-Israel is not Antisemitism”, but at some point you need to address the elephant in the room. The current mainstream “Judaism” is very much an ethnic supremacy group by design. You can’t effectively criticize Israel without pointing out that its actions are overwhelmingly supported by their citizens because of their religion. Everything they do in their eyes is completely justified because they view everyone not in their ethnic group as subhuman.
Zionism was literally always a fascist project.
This “what went wrong” line is liberal Zionists trying to launder the reputation of the colony.
Israel was founded on ethnic cleansing and atrocities like the Deir Yassin massacre. Zionists literally spelled out the need to “transfer” the indigenous population of Palestine in the early 20th century.
Zionists could rely on western media, policy makers search engine rankings and moderators to gatekeep and control the narrative and image of their colony. The difference now is that social media reveals everything directly to people.
Israel went wrong before it began. There is no way of displacing a population to create an ethnonationalist colony in a way that could be called “right”.
Note that several prominent Jews, including Hannah Arendt and Albert Einstein, opposed the creation of a Jewish state in a 1948 letter, warning of fascism and comparing the precursor of Likud to the Nazi party.
Opinion on zionism has moved over time. Zionism started out as fringe around 1900, but now its the overwhelming majority opinion across judaism.
Also, 86% of American Jews (the vast majority of Jews – about 85% are in the US or Israel) think Israel is necessary for the Jewish people. They may hold a handkerchief to their noses at “all the stuff currently going on”, but israeli terrorism, theft, abuse and repression has been going on unbroken since the founding of israel and the nakba-- farther even-- since the ottoman empire withdrew from owning that territory for 800 years, even, at the end of WW1. They cant have it both ways. If they support the existence of israel, they explicitely support the existence as its been since it started. Since day 1 of its existence there has never been a humanitarian israel rooted in equality or basic human rights, and there never will be such an Israel. So that 86% (and sure, thats not all ) supports genocide but lacks the courage to say so. We can call it genocide-lite.
I think survey results show pretty clearly that a huge majority want the outcome of genocide but dont want to be seen supporting it. They love the idea of Israel but find the deaths of other regretable, and are happy to talk your ear off about how its inconvenient for them and how afraid they are-- as if that could hold a candle to whats been done to the innocent people Israel wanted land from. Their theory is that the real vicitms here are them, even as a vast majority of them explicitly or implicitly support genocide, often from existences of day to day 110% safety-- more than any other minotiry group-- where they may only ever experience having to deal with a political opinion on a blog that they find objectionable, which they feel like they can then frame as a bodily attack on their very existence.
What needs to happen is some form of adult government installed in the Levant, not the theocratic fascist ethnostate that is Israel. A violent ethnostate is going to continue to cause global terror and mass conflict. They cant be permitted to rule, because they have shown the world they cant be trusted to do it without rampant murder.
and the 100 years of terrorism when they started moving back didn’t help
sigh
I think the “mistake” started with the formation of Israel. I can understand the founding of their state after WWII, and their desire for a place where they can live without persecution. But, the location was a huge mistake if the goal was “peace”.
Dropping them in the middle of their Holy Land? Automatic war for as long as they are there. Now, many are under the impression that they really are “God’s Chosen People” and all of their desired “Holy Land” righteously belongs to them.
I think what is happening today was the desired outcome of Israel’s foundation. USA and UK were perfectly fine with the Jews and Muslims fighting to the death, no matter who “wins”, whatever is left will be all the easier for them (Christians incidentally) to control.
personally, I am opposed to Christians, Jews, and Muslims, to me there are no “good guys” to be found in the “Holy Land”.
ETA Israel is a nuclear power now, remember that when you propose “solutions”.
The mistake is that zionists decided to force a state on the local people instead of living along the locals are a single people
In 1884 the first Yemenites settled in Silwan and for 45 years lived peacefully and on very good terms with their Arab neighbors. It seemed that the people of Silwan, which was known to be a poor village, found common ground with the poor Jewish Yemenites that lived among them.
Despite the attempt to depict the 1929 Arab Riot as a violent incident against the Jews in Silwan, it is clear that it was not the case. From a letter of gratitude that the Yemenite Jews sent to their Arab neighbors, we can learn about the devotion and benevolence that the Arabs have shown towards the Yemenites by undauntedly protecting them, and also about the amity and good neighborly relations that prevailed between the two communities.
1945: A part of Germany should have been disposessed, a jewish state founded on this territory, and this Jewish state given nuclear arms, in case any fuckin Kraut ever had “ideas” again. End of story. Would have saved Jewish people and the Palestinian people a lot of horror. Would have saved me as a German many fuckin bonkers discussions with German bigots who all are so conveniently defending a jewish state (not on their land).
Israel didn’t form because of WWII or because of Germany. The big aliyah waves started in the 1800s, and the Holocaust just accelerated what was already in motion. The Soviet Union, the Ottoman Empire, the colonized Arab areas of North Africa were all extremely antisemitic, just as much as Germany. The only difference is that Hitler made mass murder industrial.
But it did… UK and USA created the state in 1948?
They wanted Israel before WWII, but US/UK/UN formed it, and they did so because of WWII. The Jews always wanted their Holy Land, of course.
Their holy land? It is the holy land of all the Abrahamic religions. They should live together peacefully
Nope, Jews were living peacefully side by side Muslims in Arab countries in pre-Israel times. This is confirmed by Holocaust scholars like Omer Bartov. Antisemitism is historically something deeply European. It has been exported to Arab countries. Most notoriously via Amin al-Husseini. Israel would never have been founded the way it was, i.e. as a jewish ethno-state or maybe would not have been founded at all without the Holocaust.
Removed by mod
it is NOT a European concept and never was.
Yeah sure the nazis was Muslims and not Europeans. Yo are a dimwit
Also, Amin al-Husseini, was NOT antisemitic because of Europe. He was antisemitic because the environment who grew up in was.
Pure bullshit. Amin al-Husseini was pretty irrelevant , he wanted Arabs to fight for the axis but did not succeed most Arabs sided with the allies. 18k Palestinians volunteered . Yes discrimination existed but it is true that arab muslims and arab jews lived generally in good relation
From an israeli source
In 1884 the first Yemenites settled in Silwan and for 45 years lived peacefully and on very good terms with their Arab neighbors. It seemed that the people of Silwan, which was known to be a poor village, found common ground with the poor Jewish Yemenites that lived among them.
Despite the attempt to depict the 1929 Arab Riot as a violent incident against the Jews in Silwan, it is clear that it was not the case. From a letter of gratitude that the Yemenite Jews sent to their Arab neighbors, we can learn about the devotion and benevolence that the Arabs have shown towards the Yemenites by undauntedly protecting them, and also about the amity and good neighborly relations that prevailed between the two communities.
Sorry, but ethno-states are a flat-out bad idea.
Actually, the Palestinian people initially welcomed the Jewish diaspora with open arms and were totally willing to live alongside them. But Zionism is a fascist ideology, so of course the Zionists could not live equally, they had to have domination.
“Actually” what? I didn’t imply otherwise… if every Palestinian moved to Egypt tomorrow, the war would continue… Israel would continue to expand.
See “Greater Israel”.
Your comment sounded like you believe Jewish people couldn’t coexist in the region, which is untrue, the problem is the Israeli state, which exists to be a proxy for western imperialism.
My apologies if I misunderstood.
There’s definitely no good guys. If you read into the history of the region, you’ll quickly realize that there was never a “rightful” or “righteous” ruler. The ancient Persians, the Romans, the Turks, the Assyrians, the Arabs, the British, and the Israeli Jews have all been horrid. Genocide, oppression, slavery, ethnic cleansing, terrorism, deep seated hatred, and the idea of “if I don’t do fuck them over first then they’ll come after me” is the norm in this cursed region.
thats BS. The turks made peace between a lot of tribes and kept the bloodshed down. Comparing them to Israel and pretending they are the same is way beyond the pale.
The Ottoman Turks? Are you an idiot?
The Ottoman Empire was one of the most violent and brutal empires in human history. They practiced slavery and had one of the largest slave trades in the world. They would go invade their weaker neighbors unprovoked to expand their empire. When they force the people they attacked into submission they’ll take “spoils of war” and distribute them among muslim soldiers and officials as instructed by islam. Therefore, they would steal the land, loot possession, and enslave people and hand them out as rewards for winning the war.
They would specifically kidnap and enslave young women and children either as servants or as sex slaves in harems. Everybody else gets a choice of either converting to islam or becoming a second class citizen under islamic law where you’re forced to have less rights, less freedoms, face more discrimination, and harsher punishments than muslims. Oh, and you have to pay an extra tax that muslims don’t have to pay (jizya) for the privileged of being oppressed.
They also colonize the lands that they conquer. They’ll kidnap and relocate the children elsewhere, they’ll give special benefits for muslims to settle the newly annexed lands, and they’ll forcefully exile or relocate the nonmuslims if they’re in the way of muslims colonizing the land. Oh, and the conquered people have zero representation at any institutional power if they’re not muslims, and they can’t hold a high ranking position if they’re not also Turkish. Therefore these nations were often ruled by muslim rulers who ruled had no interest or obligation for the natives, they were just there to serve and enrich themselves. Because of this, a lot of the conquered nations were subject some pretty horrid treatment.
Turkish rule is so brutal that Ottoman history was filled with conquered nations breaking out in revolts, some lasted centuries because they would rather fight to the death and than be ruled by the Turks. The thing is that the Turkish reaction to revolts is so extreme that it’s infamous in history. Instead of fighting to put down the revolt, the Turks would seek to genocide that society. They want to mass murder them, take their land, erase their culture, and pretend that it was always Turkish land. They did that with the Armenians, Assyrians, Greeks, Serbs, Bulgarians, Jews, and Arab Christians.
The Ottoman genocides are some of the worst in history. The very concept of genocide was literally made to describe what the Turks did to the Armenians. This idea that the Ottoman empire was peaceful golden age is quite literally bullshit propaganda that’s funded by the Turkish government. There’s a reason why that empire collapsed, and there’s a reason why every single ethnic group in southeastern Europe, the Caucuses, and the Middle East despises it with a burning passion.
You would think that this something in the long past, right? But no. The Armenian, Greek, and Assyrian genocides are barely a century old. Turkey today still officially denies these genocides. They’re still trying to genocide the Kurds to this day. Kurdish clothes, names, music, press, and language were outright banned until the 1990s. Even today, you can’t call Kurdish towns by their Kurdish names, they can’t speak Kurdish at any position in government, they don’t true Kurdish media, and Kurdish children can’t learn Kurdish in school. Not only that, but Turkey is also actively burning down entire Kurdish villages, they’re mass arresting Kurdish activists and journalists, they’re helping Azerbaijan invade Armenia, they’re invading and occupying the Assyrian and Kurdish parts of Syria, they’re literally illegally occupying and colonizing Northern Cyprus, they’re trying to steal Greek islands and maritime territory as their own, they’re constantly bombing Kurds in Iraq to keep them down, and the list goes on and on.
They’re the biggest menace in the middle east, and this is all just legacy that was carried over from the Ottoman Empire, who by the way is heavily supported and celebrated in Turkey. Not in some delusional sense where they have a different view from what it actually was, but not Turkish nationalists are actively proud of all the genocides, oppression, and conquering they inflected upon the world and they want to see Turkey do it again.
Thinking that the Ottoman Turks were peace makers is so fucking mind numbingly stupid that it’s painful to think that there are people this ignorant out there in the world.
Oh the long winded “Palestine desnt even really exist” zionist guy wants to spew comments. OK.
Give this a read.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_the_Ottoman_EmpireAnd you call out the Ottomans empires slavery. They abolished slavery in 1840. England in 1834. The US not till 1865 I think. You going to go after England and the US too then or is it only an issue in selective cases where its convenient for you?
Oh the long winded “Palestine desnt even really exist” zionist guy wants to spew comments. OK.
If that’s what you got from my comment then you really are an idiot.
Give this a read.
The article doesn’t contradict any of the points that I made.
And you call out the Ottomans empires slavery. They abolished slavery in 1840. England in 1834. The US not till 1865 I think. You going to go after England and the US too then or is it only an issue in selective cases where its convenient for you?
The Ottomans practiced slavery for 500 years and had one of the largest slave trades in history. Playing whataboutism doesn’t disprove my point, it just shows that you’re dimwit who’s engaging in bad faith.
Are you an idiot?
then you really are an idiot.
and you are a foul mouthed little bitch. I’m getting pretty sick of your constant ad homs in comment after comment. If you cant engage with words then be quiet. This place has rules for that sort of thing. You will follow them one way or another.
This is liberal whitewashing. There are colonisers and there are the natives who are being exterminated. Its that simple.
That’s precisely the issue though. You’re dismissing important nuance and context for an oversimplified soundbites. That’s just willful ignorance. If you’re not even willing to entertain the idea of being honest then this conversation is not for you.
Where is the nuance in the Nakba? Or the Deir Yassin massacre? or the Gaza Genocide? The Zionists stole the land and are exterminating the native Palestinians, either slowly, through apartheid and land seizures, or quickly, through mass murder and ethnic cleansing.
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar
I think you need to reread the original comment you replied to because you don’t seem to understand what my claim even was
Your original comment amounts to “they’re all as bad as each other so why even worry about it”.
Its another version of “its all so complicated” or “both sides are to blame” thats why I called it whitewashing
Removed by mod
Zionism was a White Jewish Supremacist ideology from the very start and Israel was a White Jewish Supremacist and Colonialist project from the very start.
It didn’t become so, it was always so and always meant to be so, the only thing that changed was the feeling of impunity to push-back from Western nations as, over time, Israel invested a lot abroad into capturing Politics and the Press, into Kompromat gattering Honeypots such as the one headed by Epstein, and into in Propaganda, especially in Anglo-Saxon nations, thus capturing the political classes there and shifting Western public opinion in favor of Israel. As that feeling of impunity increased, so did they more freely, openly and violently practiced their ethno-Fascist (same variant of Fascism as the Nazis) ultra-racist ideology against those they very openly called “vermin” - Muslims in general, especially Palestinians.
They have and always have had, as they themselves say, “Western Values”, specifically late 19th century white colonialist values and early 20th century white supremacist ones.
PS: And if anybody has any doubt on the White part of their supremacist ideology, just look up the treatment of Black Jews from Ethiopia by the state of Israel, which included amongst other things forced sterilization.
It was a fascist ideology from its inception. We do you mean what went wrong with it?
Who would have thought that the lesson they learned from the Holocaust was to Pay It Forward?
“Became”
There were idealistic, non- (or at least less) ethnochauvinist strands of Zionism through most if its history, alongside the colonialist, genocidal factions. Those less toxic groups have been disempowered and marginalized, and now the thugs dominate.
Some (and I’m among them) are of the view that, regardless of the benign motivations of some, the logic of colonialism and single-ethnicity nationalism will always cause it to reach this end state. Using an example from the Americas, there were priests among the conquistadors who opposed the genocide of the Aztecs. They were well-meaning people who wrote some nice books. The genocide still happened.
Right, Israel is the original sin of the post war political nation state concept, established under misguided but understandable circumstances as the least terrible option among a host of really bad options. The current apartheid state was not an inevitability, even if it was predictable. The world isn’t perfect but it isn’t evil either, and the goal should always just be to do better, not worse.
This is why the current conversation about Zionism makes me uncomfortable. This awkward rhetorical alliance between the far right and far left is not helping anyone. At the same time, there are real and extremely serious problems which need to be discussed, but which are being blown out by the use of a completely overloaded term which has a long history I think many who throw it around simply do not appreciate. It’s simply unnecessary, as there are many easy to articulate criticisms of Israel which do not carry the same baggage.
Israel is subjugating Gaza, and arguably perpetuating a genocide, and that deserves a level of intellectual treatment which isn’t drenched in language historically tied to neo Nazis, and this seems like such obvious low hanging fruit that I can’t help but be concerned that it is intentional.
More concerned with Jews being called Nazi than anything else. So strange.
There is no intellectual discussions anymore and that is the whole point. Even if there was apparently it would be about why we shouldn’t call them Nazi instead of what they are doing.
Israeli and Holocaust historian Omer Bartov is
a POWERFUL Scholar!Kowledgeable about Jewish history!ANTI SEMETIC!-The BBC!
Haven’t read the book, but the title suggests things could have been different. That something happened to make things bad. If that’s the argument, it is completely wrong. Israel could have turned out no other way. Extermination is the only possible outcome of a colonial ethno-state.
being vaguely on the right side of one of easiest human rights issues humanity has ever faced and writing a book about it does not make this guy an expert. His looking for causes outside to explain the zionists as victims and not owners and perpetratos is weak sauce.
No one becomes an expert based on their opinions or conclusions. In this case, he became an expert through his Oxford PhD, and subsequent 35 year long (and counting) academic career,
He’s a historian. Looking for causes is kind of his job.
He’s an expert based on his formal education, his extensive academic research, and his long coveted career in the field. He’s very clearly experienced and knowledgeable on the subject, and his words carry a lot more weight than some nobody on Lemmy who’s just mad that some Guardian headline didn’t meet your personal level of confirmation bias.
What makes someone an “expert”, what’s the bar? Who do you think qualifies as an expert?
Better to say “has become”. The genocide is on going. We all just act as we can to try to stop it.
Always was.
Theres open repression even in free speech societies too, that if you talk about this in too strong of terms, they will attack you and the people you love. The more they are allowed to continue, the more they will seek to exert global influence on all of humanity. They need to be stopped.
This is my proposal to end the Israeli Palestinian conflict. Egypt will be given the West Bank enlarged by land equivalent to the Gaza Strip. In return, Israel will be given the Gaza Strip and land at least 3 times larger than the West Bank in the Sinai Peninsula. Some of the land will be adjacent to water so Israel can build desalination plants. The Sinai is inhospitable, and Egypt doesn’t have the technology to develop it, but Israel does. With its new land, Egypt can give it to the Palestinians, make it a state within Egypt, or whatever it wants.
Israel wants land. This is a way of giving it land without harming the Palestinians.
You’ve placed the same copy paste blurp multiple times now, and predictably everyone votes you down bectyour idea is just horribly stupid
There could be new people joining the community and others who never read it. People are dying. I offer a solution.
How arrogant. That land isn’t ours to give.
No, it’s up to Egypt and Israel.
Why Egypt and not Jordan? Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon, and Palestine are exactly the same. They’re the same people with the same culture, that were only divided by colonial borders drawn by the French and British. The idea of a Palestinian ethnicity is a new phenomenon, it didn’t exist before the 1920s. They’re Levantese Arabs. Egyptians are pretty distinct from Levantese Arabs. They have their own cuisine, history, dialect, ideas about religion, and so on. Your proposal doesn’t make sense on that front alone.
In my proposal, Egypt gives up part of the Sinai to Israel in exchange for Egypt getting the West Bank enlarged by land equivalent to the Gaza Strip which would go to Israel. What land would Jordan give to Israel?
Egypt cannot possibly govern the West Bank, it is too far from the Egyptian heartland and it is also physically separated from the rest of country. Egypt has already tried governing Gaza before and that went horribly wrong.
Jordan and the West Bank are physically connected and they’re the same culturally, therefore it makes sense for them to be together in that sense, but with that being said, Jordan also tried to rule the West Bank before and that went pretty poorly.
The biggest hurdle here is why would Egypt or Jordan participate? What would they get out of it. They would be getting a big headache in exchange for a lot of strategic land (Egypt giving the Sinai also means giving up one side of the Suez Canal and that’s a big no no in geopolitics). Not to mention, that the West Bank already has well over 700,000 settlers. Even if we exclude East Jerusalem, that’s still over 500k settlers. That’s a loooot of people, and they’re also some of most unhinged zealots you’ll find anywhere in the world. That’s even bigger headache than the Palestinians that they’ll have to take on. I just don’t see this as a realistic proposal.
Egypt would be giving up some up the Sinai not all of it. The US governs Alaska and Hawaii despite not being physically connected. Egypt will get peace at its borders. Also, fighting in Gaza and the West Bank could push Palestinian refugees into Egypt.
It’s not the same. The US has unrestricted air and ocean access to both Alaska and Hawaii, Egypt won’t have that. Not to mention, Egypt gains nothing from this deal. The Sinai is more strategically important to them
As part of the deal, Egypt could be given permission to access its new land through a specific land corridor. Egypt would gain peace on its borders. Continual fighting between Israel and Palestinian could cause a flood of migrants into Egypt.
Egypt already has peace with Israel and they’re already blocking any potential wave of Palestinian migrants and have been for decades now. Egypt doesn’t benefit from such a deal
No one cares what Israel wants anymore. Why are you catering to murderers? Could it be that you are on their side?
If someone knocks on your door, panthera, and says they will kill your entire family but they will settle for just eating your little girl, you sound like the type of person to push the girl out the door to them instead of grabbing a weapon and doing whats actually right.
You have to start with ethics and basic human rights, not triangulation and negotiation with what you think evil will be OK with.
But this is precisely the losing mentality that leads countries to their demise. There is a reason why throughout history, weaker nations pursue peace with their stronger neighbors. It’s not because they want to, its because they have to do in order to survive. Palestine, egged on by the other Arab state, bought into the idea that the one and only acceptable solution is the complete destruction of Israel, the removal of Israelis, and the establishment of an Arab Palestinian state that is ruled by Arabs. However, Palestine is very clearly outmatched by Israel, and so every attempt at pursing this goal ended up in them being further away from it.
The question then becomes, what’s the end goal? To keep trying until Palestine is fully destroyed? We’re quickly heading down that path and I don’t want to see it happen. Palestine is very clearly outmatched by Israel and there’s no realistic way for a Palestinian state over the entire region to be established. No country will intervene on their behalf and Israel isn’t going anywhere. I think it’s wise to do what other countries in a similar position have done in the past.
I think Palestine needs to do what Armenia did with Turkey or what Mongolia did with Russia and China or what Ireland did with the UK. I think it’s the pragmatic thing to do.
A better analogy would be someone offers this person a vacant lot, in exchange this person would own the place I’m living in.
Why are you catering to murderers
But Christians, Jews, and Muslims have been murdering each other in the Holy Land for many centuries.
They’re all murderers. What participant has clean hands?
They’re all murderers.
Human beings have an innate right to resist oppression and murder once available peaceful avenues have been tried.
What participant has clean hands?
One side is committing genocide and massive human rights abuses right now. One side is not.
This doesn’t disprove his statements though
Human beings have an innate right to resist oppression and murder once available peaceful avenues have been tried.
Agreed. When do you start the clock of oppression, and why at that point specifically? There have been repeated bloody conflicts for longer than we have been alive.
One side is committing genocide and massive human rights abuses right now. One side is not.
They all want to genocide the other, as they have all repeated constantly (today and in centuries prior)… and they all have committed genocide. No one has clean hands here.
All parties have committed countless human rights abuses for decades or even centuries, and still do right now.
They won’t ever stop until only one people owns “The Holy Land”… and Israel is the only nuclear power. Remember that when you propose “solutions”, you must disarm Israel and/or have their support…
