Comment by Arkhaine_kupo

Comment by Arkhaine_kupo 2 days ago

2 replies

> I would suggest that its less of a unique part as it once was.

I would argue its more relevant than ever. Anti semitism is on the rise globally. Multiple groups like Russia and Iran have made it the corner stone of some of its geopolitical strategy. The whole Soros is behind every disaster in the West is a russian psy op. Covid vaccines are jewish experiments on people is blood libel and also russian funded. Trans people and immigration waves are jewish plots to destabilise the west, another russian op. Half the right wing influencer peddle in antisemitism or related conspiracies left right and centre. Jordan peterson neo marxism, stephen miller (Trumps advisor) great replacement theory etc

With that amount of misinformation spreading without control in social media, a uniquely jewish country is a perfect target for the misdirected anger.

See a genocide in Sudan getting 0 attention while the first week after Oct 7th, before any large Israel counter offensive there were already groups organising anti war protests and marches.

> sectarianism isn't new or unique to this conflict

Sectarianism is less of a problem. Its the religious aspect. If I think there is no afterlife I would protect my children, if I believe death at war is the most holy thing there is you end up with figures like Mother of martyrs,Umm Nidal, who was the first woman elected in Gaza in the election Hamas won. She was a viral figure because of a video telling her 17 year old boy to go and kill jews and not come home, he went to a university and shot 5 people and injured 23 before being shot down during the second intifada.

No other conflict has mothers begging their underage kids to go kill civilians. You will not see videos in Ukraine of mother asking babies to fight. Because that is an insane thing to do and really makes political compromise really difficult when human life's value is rendered worthless.

There is also the issue of Israel not caring about Palestinian lives, that has less to do with religion but the constant state of threat the entire country is under has given the military a shoot first ask later approach that again really devalues life.

> People are fighting because someone they knew has been injured, killed or suffered from this war.

Revenge does not explain a conflict that has been going on for a century or more. There was unrest from the late 1800s in the region with the first waves of Jewish immigration. No one knew somoene injured back then.

From a current stand point, after losing in 1946,1947, 1956, 1967, 1983,2002 and 2014 you would at some point just concede, set peace terms and then use diplomacy for compromise post war talks. Kinda what Ireland did, they lost, gave up the terrorism and fought in the courts and internationally for rights and governance over the region. Northern ireland being part of Ireland was closer during brexit than at any point during the IRA.

Palestine really has no more fight and still rejects every 2 state solution due to disagreeing on terms. Which I get that losing parts of east jerusalmen and the settlement locations are insulting to them, but they had those in 1947 and still turned it down which makes it hard to know what they would actually agree to.

KaiserPro 2 days ago

So I think we are closer in opinion than you might think.

> No one knew somoene injured back then.

No, but thats the point its an active war. Ireland's conflict has been going on in ebbs and flows since 1919, but it's roots were set way back. Someone you know has been injured by the "other side" in every generation. Its a generational conflict, sadly.

  • Arkhaine_kupo 18 hours ago

    > Ireland's conflict has been going on in ebbs and flows since 1919

    But the big difference in this conflict is that Ireland was colonised prior to 1919. They were always the underdog, and still are.

    In 1880 when the first waves of refugees arrived, Palestine was part of the Ottoman empire, mostly Muslim and there was economic and ethnic mayority of arabs. And the first pogroms already happened then.

    The original partiton the british proposed was, in part, because they considered the arab violence against the jewish population to be a big issue. There were other terrible reasons like the british who designed the plan was an antisemite and thought Israel would be enticing for european jews to leave. But the reality of the origins of the fight was that a bunch of refugees arrived, built their own insular communities and they got attacked to the point the UN decided them having their own country would be safer.

    If Ireland became 1 country, even if they mistreated the british people in northern Ireland later you could hardly say they have always been the aggresor because we know thats not true. Somehow Israel story has been flipped where instead of the underdog, now becoming dominant, they are seen as always the one on top. Other historical inaccuracies like America's allyship with Israel is considered eternal when in reality it started in 1960s when Egypt tried to take over the Suez Canal. America only cares about free trade and boat routes. In 1947 they sided with the Arab league, due to access to oil, who said they would exterminate the jews in the UN floor and no one stopped them despite military analysis in Uk, france and USA agreeing they would win against Israel.