80 percent of buildings in northern gaza are destroyed and 700000 figure is not any better, genocidal freaks article behind paywall, can’t see it
800,000 [left]
Where did they go?
Didn’t palastine/hamas start this war with a completely surprise invasion that gunned down 1200 people, including women and children?
- It didn’t. It is a resistence of an occupied people against a occupation force. It’s ongoing since 1948, with Israel having started large scale ethnic cleansing and massacres the year prior.
- Hamas and its allies did targeted strikes at military installations sorrounding Gaza (I wonder why those exist, hmmmm), Israel placed said installations next to civilian settlements.
- Per current information, the number killed by hamas et all is at around 600. Almost entirely military and security forces.
- Israel, gunned down the rest with helicopters and tanks. Clear evidence are the mountains of burned cars shown after the event. The Hamas fighters were lightly armed and had nowhere near the firepower to do so much damage.
Didn’t Israel/Europeans start this war by occupying Palestine and driving out nearly a million Palestinians then caging 2 million of them in a sliver of land?
So that justified it?
*edit: I’d like to point out at this moment that the top two replies to this question have equal votes of one saying “yes” and while the other says “no”.
The middle east conflict will continue to go on until one side or the other has nothing left.
So that justified it?
The zionist soldiers killed? Yes. An occupied people has the right to resist.
The zionist cops killed? Yes. An occupied people has the right to resist.
The zionist settlers killed? Yes. An occupied people has the right to resist.
The hundreds of people killed by friendly fire from incompetent and poorly trained zionist troops? Not really the resistance’s fault, is it?
The children? No. It is a tragedy that their reckless parents took them to live on stolen land in a war zone.
*edit: I’d like to point out at this moment that the top two replies to this question have equal votes of one saying “yes” and while the other says “no”
Are you too stupid that you cannot read what Wakmrow and I wrote as both being pro Palestine lmao? You know you have to read past the first word, right?
No violence from an oppressed people against their oppressor is unjustified.
Perhaps you should examine why you think those 1200 people are causus belli for what’s left of Palestine being turned into a crater after the rest of it was stolen, many of the people living there being expelled, and the remainder treated as stupid savages for decades.
Your edit is wrong as you can not read. The “Middle East conflict” is the Israeli colonization of Palestine, not your imagined cycle of violence
Imagine saying “wow anc so violent, the South African conflict will go on until one side or the other has nothing left.” Absurd, right? Yet because you don’t view Palestinians as human beings who deserve the land and homes ripped from their hands within living memory, you comfort yourself with banalities
How come it was noble for the English to “never surrender” and fight back against the Nazis during the Blitz, but Palestinians are just supposed to accept getting ethnically cleansed from their homeland?
From MLK’s “The Other America”:
…[I]t is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society. These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard.
You should probably read the full text.
Oh comrades, I have a close friend who takes this same ahistorical, atheoretical approach to understanding history and sociology. He thinks he’s that much smarter for his enlightened centrist position that any imposition by the state makes life that much worse. As if the thing that attracts him to poor, third world countries is his capacity to bribe officials and be left alone. He fucking hates China because they snubbed real estate investors and home ownership rates are propped up by lies. So it’s like you’d never make headway in the argument because China is dishonest, so figures don’t matter. Xijiang would meet a similar intellectual wall.
The point is that it’s heartbreaking. I like the friend and we have a tight relationship. But then I see them talk like this person posts and they think they’re really onto something in understanding how the world should work instead of just slurping down gallons of US state propaganda. It’s like they have an atrophied capacity to see that a different state of affairs is not only possible, but being created as we speak. Like imagine having to see this poster do this drivel and then realize that they’re the person with whom you confide your most intimate thoughts and feelings.
Honestly, it’s a bit generous to this poster because my friend even recognizes the Palestinian struggle as justified against a settler colonial state acting as an appendage of the US war machine. This person probably can’t conceptualize the idea that someone whose way of life is more similar to theirs might be the aggressor in a conflict.
Almost 70 years of displacement, terror and oppression results in some pushback. Violent pushback, because peacefull pushback was gunned down by Isn’treal. Happened not too long ago.
Israel started it in 1947, doubled down 1948 and ever since. The zionist entity made its clear that it will not accept anything but absolute occupation of Palestine, with the ethnic cleansing of the region from palestineans as the end goal.
How many of those do you think the IDF actually killed? They immediately buried the vehicles from the rave a mile outside of the largest open air prison in the world, because as everyone knows machine guns cause cars to explode and catch fire like in an action movie and not with hellfire missiles from a helicopter.
Revolutionary violence, when put against a settler-colonial state, is always self-defense, therefore justified.
Also, to answer your question, no. It started right after the fucking illegal creation of the state of “israel”.
It started right after the fucking illegal creation of the state of “israel”.
arguably before that even. colonial zionism is older than the nation-state
Are you one of those dickheads that thinks there is no other history behind this conflict and that it only started on Oct 7th?
It is occupied and stolen land that belongs to Palestine. They are fighting for liberation against an occupation that has them trapped in a 25 x 4 mile long open air prison with a complete blockade against it.
Exercise some fucking thought and intellectual curiosity for once in your fucking life.
No, Zionists started this by being land-stealing settler colonists that put Palestinians into ghettos as part of an apartheid system. Decades of disposession, abuse, disablement, murder. Far, far higher numbers than you cite.
If you think that the equation is as simple as the number of dead women and children then you should be on the side of Palestine.
Quick question, do you think warsaw ghetto uprising against its lawful rulers was justified?
Additionally, 400 of them were idf members, which makes even such fucked up operation better than israel either by ratio to civilians or volume of death.
Isreal wasn’t ruling over Palestine when they were attacked.
Why would Palestine/hamas invade a city in isreal and shoot everyone they could if they did not want this war? Palestine set the rules for this war. Surprise attack. Gun down everyone. After setting up the appearance of being in a truce.
They didn’t gun down everyone they could see. They conducted a highly planned military operation against the IDF. The vast majority of the 700 civilians were killed when the Israeli military opened fire on everything that moved. They used Apache helicopters to fire hellfire missiles and 30mm high explosive auto cannons and Merkava tanks to fire 120mm high explosive shells into groups of civilians.
The israelis quite literally did exactly what you accuse the resistance of.
Ah, so we go by establishing rules of war by precedent? Consider isnreal started its illustrious career of warcrimes by deir yassin massacre then.
And isntreal is ruling over palestine, mate, they control trade, they control calorie intake in gaza, they block their recognition as a state, they exploded airport and block maritime trafic for a long time now.
So you seem to be in the age when elder millennials start losing cognitive curiosity and comprehension in favor of dogma and selective narrative seeking in favor of empiricism.
How do you dismiss accusations of genocide except for ignoring the evidence and associating accusers with caricatures of 2013 meme culture SJWs?
Bro what? The guards at the world’s largest open-air prison don’t actually run the prison?
Israel’s sweeping restrictions on leaving Gaza deprive its more than two million residents of opportunities to better their lives, Human Rights Watch said today on the fifteenth anniversary of the 2007 closure. The closure has devastated the economy in Gaza, contributed to fragmentation of the Palestinian people, and forms part of Israeli authorities’ crimes against humanity of apartheid and persecution against millions of Palestinians.
Israel’s closure policy blocks most Gaza residents from going to the West Bank, preventing professionals, artists, athletes, students, and others from pursuing opportunities within Palestine and from traveling abroad via Israel, restricting their rights to work and an education. Restrictive Egyptian policies at its Rafah crossing with Gaza, including unnecessary delays and mistreatment of travelers, have exacerbated the closure’s harm to human rights.
Oh my god open a fucking history book.
NO INVESTIGATION, NO RIGHT TO SPEAK
Unless you have investigated a problem, you will be deprived of the right to speak on it. Isn’t that too harsh? Not in the least. When you have not probed into a problem, into the present facts and its past history, and know nothing of its essentials, whatever you say about it will undoubtedly be nonsense. Talking nonsense solves no problems, as everyone knows, so why is it unjust to deprive you of the right to speak? Quite a few comrades always keep their eyes shut and talk nonsense, and for a Communist that is disgraceful. How can a Communist keep his eyes shut and talk nonsense?
