Hacker News Reader

Comment by cess11 | Hacker News Reader

[flagged]

This is a very bizarre conspiracy theory definition.

How so? Which part do you disagree with, the violent crimes or that most participants in the movement are christians?

It's like defining Germany as "a state that genocided various groups", or defining Irish nationalism as "a movement characterized by terrorist attacks against British civilians". Whether or not those claims are accurate, they're not defining features of the things we're trying to define.

And sure, most Zionists are not Jews because the Jewish population is too tiny to be a majority in almost any political category. Similarly most people who support Somaliland independence are not Somalilanders, but probably Indians or Chinese or something.

The zionist movement has never been peaceful, it has always aimed for violent expulsion of native populations from Palestine. One might argue that socialist or liberal zionism is not overtly jewish supremacist, but in practice they always were so I'd contest that. Unlike the irish they also did not have a reason to exterminate the palestinians specifically, whereas the irish have good reason to resist british influence.

So you agree that zionism is a movement mainly consisting of christians, you're just not aware that both christian and jewish zionists prefer to paint the movement as a jewish underdog and distract from things like the nukes and nuke carrying backers and the genocide and so on.

Palestinians rejected the UN offer of their own country and tried and failed to destroy Israel. That is pretty violent.

They have been reluctant to give up their homeland, you mean. Yes, resistance to occupation and genocide is usually to some extent violent, because the occupier is extremely violent to begin with.

They never actually had sovereign control over the land. It was controlled by Romans and then by the Turks and then by the British and when the British left it was basically up for grabs.

Sharing the land with another group of people who are also from the region would not be "giving up their homeland".

Sharing the land with european colonists that used terrorism and ethnic cleansing to remove and to a lesser extent subjugate the native population? Why would they?

If you're suggesting that a peoples' right to live in their homeland is forfeited as a result of immigration, terrorism or ethnic cleansing, that would be bad news for Palestinians. Gaza and WB Area A are Jew-free zones, and there were around 30k rocket attacks from Gaza alone.

Quite the opposite, I'm suggesting the palestinians still have a right to their homelands even though europeans have settled, terrorised and displaced them.

Yeah, what about "rocket attacks"? Are they somehow more devastating than the US-israeli armory? If someone spits in front of my feet, then I can have them watch while I beat their family to death?

It is really despicable the way people like you completely dismiss Hamas atrocities like what they did on Oct 7 2023 when 1,219 people were killed by the attacks: at least 810 civilians (including 38 children and 71 foreign nationals) and at least 379 members of the security forces. 364 civilians were killed while they were attending the Nova music festival and many more wounded. Israel exists and the Palestinians will never be able to defeat it and they are very stupid for trying and failing for 76 years.

The explicit goal of Hamas is the ethnic cleansing of Israel of all Jews.

No, it is not. Here's Ahmed Yassin on the issue:

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/DY0O9O9xR2Q

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFuIbjxXC9k

He was assassinated by the israelis, who were actually doing ethnic cleansing for decades before that.

It's weird how you care more about some future atrocity you fantasise about than actual atrocities.

Hamas's official position, expressed in its original 1988 charter and repeatedly affirmed by many of its leaders' statements and actions (including the October 7, 2023 attack), is to destroy the state of Israel and establish an Islamic state in its place "from the river to the sea". The 1988 charter explicitly called for the killing of Jews as a religious duty.

Arabs moved there from elsewhere also.

Cristian evangelicals would be a much better term.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com