The funniest shit is the hypocrisy in here. Some Arab nations want Israel gone for supposedly displacing the local Palestinian population and taking over Arab lands. They are cool with what Hamas and Hezbollah do, but when Europeans peacefully enforce their laws and deport illegals, they all cry ethnic cleansing. Go figure.
Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine are you having fun al? are you having van al? dei has never hurt anyone you jackass dei must go gaolang > your fav hi rej hi rejj hi rejjj is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? life goal sister harem real madrid reloaded is innocent tax is the best thing ever happened to us trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you watch for haters weebs discussing politics lmao worst thread ever
Yes and no.
How is it “intentional”? Who do you think is responsible for people from worst countries wanting to live in better countries?
[automerge]1763339127[/automerge]
Anyways I do think it is sensible to secure borders to try to control the flow of immigrants.
But deporting people established in your country because you perceive them as being foreign is immoral by any standard.
There is no ethical way to do it. If you create a mechanism by which the state can deport millions of people, it will inevitably be weaponized against citizens.
I know this because this is being tried in my country and this is what the people doing it wish to do.
[automerge]1763339262[/automerge]
migration is a natural part of human existence. Every group on earth has migrated at various points in the past.
drawing arbitrary lines in the sand as to who is valid and who isn’t valid doesn’t benefit anyone. It just creates a mechanism by which people can be divided and oppressed.
[automerge]1763339127[/automerge]
Anyways I do think it is sensible to secure borders to try to control the flow of immigrants.
But deporting people established in your country because you perceive them as being foreign is immoral by any standard.
There is no ethical way to do it. If you create a mechanism by which the state can deport millions of people, it will inevitably be weaponized against citizens.
I know this because this is being tried in my country and this is what the people doing it wish to do.
[automerge]1763339262[/automerge]
migration is a natural part of human existence. Every group on earth has migrated at various points in the past.
drawing arbitrary lines in the sand as to who is valid and who isn’t valid doesn’t benefit anyone. It just creates a mechanism by which people can be divided and oppressed.
Last edited:
We have natural mechanisms that people use to separate themselves; they are called language barriers, distinct cultures, social classes, and so on... THE BIGGEST OF THEM IS CALLED NATION STATES. Your rhetoric just denies the sovereignty of national states. Being allowed to migrate anywhere is a privilege and not a right. Be glad your daddy was allowed in the US and love your nation. European authorities are to be blamed for this, obviously. "Migration is natural"—appeal to nature fallacy right there. Just because it is a common occurrence all over history doesn't mean it is inherently good or bad. The current migrant crisis in Europe has caused a security crisis as well; only bad faith cowards will deny that.
You speak as if the nations that oppose Israel don't have questionable morals as well: "Sharia Law," "Terrorism," "Multiple wars," "Questionable cultural practices," and so on. The entire history of that region is war and tragedy.
Palestine never existed historically. The British allowed the Jews to migrate to the land they occupied.
Yes, and...? Wait, aren't you that Indian American wannabe Jew that said, "I'm not fighting shit for America," and that Indians should vote left to gain power in the West, or am I confusing you with someone else?
Which one of you is it?
Yubel?
You speak as if the nations that oppose Israel don't have questionable morals as well: "Sharia Law," "Terrorism," "Multiple wars," "Questionable cultural practices," and so on. The entire history of that region is war and tragedy.
Palestine never existed historically. The British allowed the Jews to migrate to the land they occupied.
Yes, and...? Wait, aren't you that Indian American wannabe Jew that said, "I'm not fighting shit for America," and that Indians should vote left to gain power in the West, or am I confusing you with someone else?
Which one of you is it?
There has never been a Palestinian state governing that place in history. Roman Emperor Hadrian renamed Judea to Syria Palaestina. Scholars widely see this fact as a punitive measure to sever the historical tie of Jews to that land by linking it to the Philistines. Keep in mind the Philistines were ancient enemies of the Jews that were long gone from the region when this happened.
The Palestinian region is a mere Roman fabrication. Archeology easily proves the ancestral ties of Jews to that region. The modern day Palestinians were offered a sovereign nation multiples times. They said "no" in all of them. Palestinians don't want a two-state solution. They want to destroy Israel and expel Jews from the region. "Free Palestine" is bullshit.
The Palestinian region is a mere Roman fabrication. Archeology easily proves the ancestral ties of Jews to that region. The modern day Palestinians were offered a sovereign nation multiples times. They said "no" in all of them. Palestinians don't want a two-state solution. They want to destroy Israel and expel Jews from the region. "Free Palestine" is bullshit.
First of all: Nation-states are a modern occurence. Palestine the state did no exist, Palestine the region did. Populated by Palestinians ("Palestinian Identity" by Rashid Khalidi).
Second: Palestinians neither were offered soveriegnity nor did they decline a two state solution. Nor do they want the destruction of Jews and Israel. None of the peace talks ever looked at the Palestinian state solution as anything legitimate and the offers were down right laughable.
And even with the acceptance of the current proposal, the West Bank is being colonized as we speak. A clear showcase of state on stae aggression.
Now, if someone wants to destroy certain people it is Theodor Herzl's political project with Ben Gvir and his successors. I recommend looking into the setting up of Israel and the literal quotes of its founders that describe it as a "colonial project" in need of "critical mass" (i.e. jewish people) in order to have the majority. And the current rights (lack thereof) of the Palestinians within Israel.
Second: Palestinians neither were offered soveriegnity nor did they decline a two state solution. Nor do they want the destruction of Jews and Israel. None of the peace talks ever looked at the Palestinian state solution as anything legitimate and the offers were down right laughable.
And even with the acceptance of the current proposal, the West Bank is being colonized as we speak. A clear showcase of state on stae aggression.
Now, if someone wants to destroy certain people it is Theodor Herzl's political project with Ben Gvir and his successors. I recommend looking into the setting up of Israel and the literal quotes of its founders that describe it as a "colonial project" in need of "critical mass" (i.e. jewish people) in order to have the majority. And the current rights (lack thereof) of the Palestinians within Israel.
You have a massive ethical problem. It's not about the "morals" of the country that is being colonized. Colonization would not be a good thing EVEN if the population was horrible. Colonization is unethical, PERIOD. As such, no matter the culture, people who get colonized must be defended. As an absolute comparison : Your rethoric is similar to justify rape against deepshit women. Wake up.
Yes it did. There are literally chart of the territory. Not as a coherent country but it's not the point mate. Colonization is not only about the country, it's about taking people's home. And no matter your fucking culture, you have no right taking the fucking home of people. Do you get it or do you need a todler drawing with basic explanations ? The people are the nation.
Thus taking people home and land that was already NOT theirs. You are F hopeless omg.
So if I stole your house and I allow you to keep your bathroom, you will be happy?
Which is meaningless, has jews were already in Palestine. Just like other communities. But it's not these people who created and promoted zionism, but far right ethno nationalist. Jews never had special rights to this territory.
Indeed, because it would mean accepting colonization and apartheid. Two things that you do not understand. But if you lived these situation, trust me that you would.
The only BS here is you. You are ignorant on top of completely blind and deaf to Palestinian voices. The destruction of Israel doesn't mean getting jew out. It means giving back the territory back and creating a country where all people (Israelian and Palestinian, because Israel is not only composed of jews only, ignorant) can live happy with proper material conditions.
Yes it did. There are literally chart of the territory. Not as a coherent country but it's not the point mate. Colonization is not only about the country, it's about taking people's home. And no matter your fucking culture, you have no right taking the fucking home of people. Do you get it or do you need a todler drawing with basic explanations ? The people are the nation.
Thus taking people home and land that was already NOT theirs. You are F hopeless omg.
So if I stole your house and I allow you to keep your bathroom, you will be happy?
Which is meaningless, has jews were already in Palestine. Just like other communities. But it's not these people who created and promoted zionism, but far right ethno nationalist. Jews never had special rights to this territory.
Indeed, because it would mean accepting colonization and apartheid. Two things that you do not understand. But if you lived these situation, trust me that you would.
The only BS here is you. You are ignorant on top of completely blind and deaf to Palestinian voices. The destruction of Israel doesn't mean getting jew out. It means giving back the territory back and creating a country where all people (Israelian and Palestinian, because Israel is not only composed of jews only, ignorant) can live happy with proper material conditions.
it just seems odd that you’d be so against folks immigrating to Europe when your people are literally doing it
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Portugal
Anyways Indians shouldn’t vote left to gain power in the west. They should vote left because, at least in America, the right is openly white/christian nationalist.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Portugal
Anyways Indians shouldn’t vote left to gain power in the west. They should vote left because, at least in America, the right is openly white/christian nationalist.
i mean, that is the point though. During the british mandate, the country still wasnt theirs, they were there for rent basically. Just like the jews. That was the purpose of the british mandate in that particular region. violence between jews and arabs in the region started before the formation of israel as well.
And then the initial UN partition plan divided it into 55/45 ish % of the area. Might seem unfair at face value, but among the 55% of what was supposed to be israel there was alot of unfertile desert areas. Israel accepted this two state partition, arabs didnt. And one day after the formation of israel, palestinian arabs and armies of other neighbor countries like egypt or jordan invaded the area, with transjordan ironically being against the establishment of a palestinian state and instead wanting the land for itself, and even held the west bank for a couple decades.
[automerge]1763390720[/automerge]
since "muslim" is not an ethnic identity either, why would i assume that?
that wouldnt even remotely make any sense.
[automerge]1763390876[/automerge]
which is weird because thats the actual apartheid going on, since palestinians arent israeli citizen, the mistreatment of them doesnt fall under apartheid.
maybe not many people know about this because what they know about palestine is bad enough already and is getting major focus everywhere.
But yeah, i remember shit like forced sterilizations on ethiopian jews, disgusting
And then the initial UN partition plan divided it into 55/45 ish % of the area. Might seem unfair at face value, but among the 55% of what was supposed to be israel there was alot of unfertile desert areas. Israel accepted this two state partition, arabs didnt. And one day after the formation of israel, palestinian arabs and armies of other neighbor countries like egypt or jordan invaded the area, with transjordan ironically being against the establishment of a palestinian state and instead wanting the land for itself, and even held the west bank for a couple decades.
[automerge]1763390720[/automerge]
since "muslim" is not an ethnic identity either, why would i assume that?
that wouldnt even remotely make any sense.
[automerge]1763390876[/automerge]
which is weird because thats the actual apartheid going on, since palestinians arent israeli citizen, the mistreatment of them doesnt fall under apartheid.
maybe not many people know about this because what they know about palestine is bad enough already and is getting major focus everywhere.
But yeah, i remember shit like forced sterilizations on ethiopian jews, disgusting