On The State of Israel - Should it exist, or should it not? Is it already just fine, or do some things need to be fixed?

[Doctor Placebo]

The big difference is that the Afrikaners fucked up and lost the ability to rule their country. The world doesn't work with participation trophies where you get awarded a country for really deserving it. No, you need to take it away from others, usually bloodily. I don't know a lot of the history of the Afrikaners, but if they are the majority yet despite it they surrendered their autonomy then they are responsible for the state they are in.

They aren't and weren't the majority, but in both cases international embargoes and external pressure were major factors in them losing control of their governments. Rhodesia in particular kept trying to negotiate a power sharing deal between the black majority and white minority, and the international forces backed by both the Soviet bloc AND the British commonwealth kept nixing their proposals for supposedly giving the white minority too much power, even though blacks still would've had the majority of representation in both the executive and legislative branches. The USA under Carter gave them the cold shoulder. Despite Rhodesia having a rich economy, they struggled against a universal trade embargo from day one, that only a few nations violated. After the Carnation Revolution in Portugal and South Africa agreed to embargo them in an act of feeding their friends to the alligator in hopes of being eaten last, Rhodesia lost their only sources of military supplies.

The Rhodesians were winning the Bush War before their supply lines dried up. That wasn't due to the actions of ZANU, ZAPU, or even the Soviets or red Chinese. It was because of western liberals, the same group that refused to accept any compromise the Rhodies put forward. Of course, instead of everyone locking arms and singing Kumbaya, the final result was genocide, not just against the white minority, but of the black minority political opposition to Mugabe too.

As for South Africa, their situation went similarly except that there was no all out war and the majority political party under the apartheid government decided to opt for appeasement of the international community pretty quickly once sanctions were threatened.

Western liberals have not treated Israel remotely the same. The US gives Israel boatloads of aid and supplies, often free of charge. Any country that wants to can trade and make economic agreements with Israel. Israel is in almost the opposite situation internationally as Rhodesia was. That it's illegal for companies to boycott Israel in the US is testament to that. If they literally had to go up against the entire world, not just their home grown insurgents and hostile neighboring countries, but also full military support of their enemies by the communist bloc at its peak, and complete trade embargo by the bulk of NATO, the Israelis might find it a bit more difficult to maintain "their ability to rule their country" than it has been.

 

[Gapernaper Rifle]

I don't get why anyone who doesn't live in the region gives a single fuck. Whether or not Israel exists or not has no impact on my life, or the life of most people in America. If they want to fight it out in the Middle East, great, just keep it over there. We shouldn't send anyone aid (especially since we basically fund both sides of the conflict) or boots for any reason.

If Israel was not there, it would probably be you guys being drawn into fights across Southern Europe. If there's one thing we should have learned about the Middle East by now; if they're not fighting among themselves, they're trying to invade Europe.

I couldn't give a fuck about Europe either.

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

They aren't and weren't the majority, but in both cases international embargoes and external pressure were major factors in them losing control of their governments. Rhodesia in particular kept trying to negotiate a power sharing deal between the black majority and white minority, and the international forces backed by both the Soviet bloc AND the British commonwealth kept nixing their proposals for supposedly giving the white minority too much power, even though blacks still would've had the majority of representation in both the executive and legislative branches. The USA under Carter gave them the cold shoulder. Despite Rhodesia having a rich economy, they struggled against a universal trade embargo from day one, that only a few nations violated. After the Carnation Revolution in Portugal and South Africa agreed to embargo them in an act of feeding their friends to the alligator in hopes of being eaten last, Rhodesia lost their only sources of military supplies.

The Rhodesians were winning the Bush War before their supply lines dried up. That wasn't due to the actions of ZANU, ZAPU, or even the Soviets or red Chinese. It was because of western liberals, the same group that refused to accept any compromise the Rhodies put forward. Of course, instead of everyone locking arms and singing Kumbaya, the final result was genocide, not just against the white minority, but of the black minority political opposition to Mugabe too.

As for South Africa, their situation went similarly except that there was no all out war and the majority political party under the apartheid government decided to opt for appeasement of the international community pretty quickly once sanctions were threatened.

Western liberals have not treated Israel remotely the same. The US gives Israel boatloads of aid and supplies, often free of charge. Any country that wants to can trade and make economic agreements with Israel. Israel is in almost the opposite situation internationally as Rhodesia was. That it's illegal for companies to boycott Israel in the US is testament to that. If they literally had to go up against the entire world, not just their home grown insurgents and hostile neighboring countries, but also full military support of their enemies by the communist bloc at its peak, and complete trade embargo by the bulk of NATO, the Israelis might find it a bit more difficult to maintain "their ability to rule their country" than it has been.

If we're going to play Opression Olympics I can point to examples such as the UN decision that equates Zionism with Racism and the 1973 oil crisis as pretty decisive events. While I'm not so sure about how much the USA left went with its anti-Israel stance (though there are modern examples like the Somali congresswoman), the European left is very anti-Israel, especially the more radical commie factions. There is a lot of bad takes the Labour party in the UK did against Israel, or, a more radical example, the Baader Meinhof gang. Online it was easy to find armchair commies who go with: Israel = USA influence = Capitalism mindset around 10 years ago.
Also usually when something happens with the palestinians you can be sure the "Jewish" old media will take the position against Israel. Such as arguing that getting rockets shot on civilian populace is acceptable and not a big deal. Or that the violent protest on the border are just "peaceful protests".

The relative stability Israel has now in regards to the Palestinians is mainly due to bad orange man becoming the focus of the media in the west, which also caused a peace with Muslim countries. Also I didn't include past wars with surrounding arabs countries, which had the Israelis routinely having a disadvantage in the number of troops.

Basically, it's not sunshine and roses for Israel and only the last decade had the left give up on taking it down (in the meantime at least).

 

[Existential MD]

If we're going to play Opression Olympics I can point to examples such as the UN decision that equates Zionism with Racism and the 1973 oil crisis as pretty decisive events. While I'm not so sure about how much the USA left went with its anti-Israel stance (though there are modern examples like the Somali congresswoman), the European left is very anti-Israel, especially the more radical commie factions. There is a lot of bad takes the Labour party in the UK did against Israel, or, a more radical example, the Baader Meinhof gang. Online it was easy to find armchair commies who go with: Israel = USA influence = Capitalism mindset around 10 years ago.
Also usually when something happens with the palestinians you can be sure the "Jewish" old media will take the position against Israel. Such as arguing that getting rockets shot on civilian populace is acceptable and not a big deal. Or that the violent protest on the border are just "peaceful protests".

The relative stability Israel has now in regards to the Palestinians is mainly due to bad orange man becoming the focus of the media in the west, which also caused a peace with Muslim countries. Also I didn't include past wars with surrounding arabs countries, which had the Israelis routinely having a disadvantage in the number of troops.

Basically, it's not sunshine and roses for Israel and only the last decade had the left give up on taking it down (in the meantime at least).

Omar is right. Why, exactly, should the US subsidize israel with billions of dollars and a huge hit to our international standing? America is an outlier w/r/t Israel and it's not a good position.

 

[Marshal Mannerheim]

Omar is right. Why, exactly, should the US subsidize israel with billions of dollars and a huge hit to our international standing? America is an outlier w/r/t Israel and it's not a good position.

Indeed.

On the subject of Omar - and this is a pretty controversial view especially from a conservative - I think she got massively screwed over by the press. Israel and its lobby have a lot of influence on how we in the West run things, which we would not accept from any other country. Heck, I don't think any other country, at any other point in time, has subsidised a foreign power which has the tools it needs to defend itself (Israeli nukes) and has previously attacked that country (USS Liberty). The fact that Ilhan Omar is a completely pants-on-head, tax-and-spend leftist doesn't mean we shouldn't defend her when she's obviously being attacked under false pretences.

Edit - don't politisperg before you have your coffee.

 

[Siamon]

Fuck the Middle East, they're a bunch of blip blops propagating destructive ideologies like some sort of parasite—acting like they are living in 600 CE.

It's a shame these kinds of people still exist in the 21ST CENTURY.

 

[Elwood P. Dowd]

The Zionists have already lost in one sense. The old-school Zionists were all European (including Russia), though the Germans and Austrians predominated. But the Ashnekazi Jews are rapidly being outbred by the Sephardim, or the Jews from North Africa and the Middle East. This shift will be complete long before you need to worry about any sort of Muslim majority by births.

It is kind of like Anglicans setting up a Protestant homeland and being outbred by Baptists.

 

[Marshal Mannerheim]

Fuck the Middle East, they're a bunch of blip blops propagating destructive ideologies like some sort of parasite—acting like they are living in 600 CE.

It's a shame these kinds of people still exist in the 21ST CENTURY.

You are Moviebob and I claim my 5 superior future credits.

 

[IbnTaymiyyah]

I object to the formation of any state on purely religious grounds. Therefore, I fundamentally object to the existence of Israel and Pakistan.

 

[Biden's Chosen]

The Zionists have already lost in one sense. The old-school Zionists were all European (including Russia), though the Germans and Austrians predominated. But the Ashnekazi Jews are rapidly being outbred by the Sephardim, or the Jews from North Africa and the Middle East. This shift will be complete long before you need to worry about any sort of Muslim majority by births.

It is kind of like Anglicans setting up a Protestant homeland and being outbred by Baptists.

It's not a big deal. We have no overbearing need to have genuine and honest democracy so as long as we maintain rule and get to sit and eat like effendi, it is alright if we're not the ones breeding like rabbits or other pests.

 

[Elwood P. Dowd]

It's not a big deal. We have no overbearing need to have genuine and honest democracy so as long as we maintain rule and get to sit and eat like effendi, it is alright if we're not the ones breeding like rabbits or other pests.

As best I can tell Bibi is in power largely due to the voting power of the Sephardim-descended. (Maybe with second generation Russian Jews in there somewhere too. The ones who left the USSR and their their children.) Maybe I'm wrong, since data of this sort seems close to impossible to find, but it makes at least intuitive sense. The Muslims sure as hell aren't voting him in, and I doubt the Christians and Druze are, either.

Possibly this is why the largely Ashnekazi-descended Jews of the USA and Europe loathe him? And IIRC he just ignores them.

Hell, Jews from places like Yemen often arrived in Israel as late as the 1960s with a wifey # 2 in tow. Much to the horror of the then Asknekazi majority. They're basically ethnic and cultural Arabs who happen to have practiced Judaism (to their credit, stubbornly and in the face of some serious persecution) since time out of mind. But I can't imagine they're what Theordore Herzl or Ben-Gurion or Max Brod or whoever the others were had in mind as the majority population of this Zionist paradise, full of Kibbutzim or whatever nowadays extinct other nonsense they promulgated at the First Zionist Congress in 1897.

 

[Biden's Chosen]

Hell, Jews from places like Yemen often arrived in Israel as late as the 1960s with a wifey # 2 in tow. Much to the horror of the then Asknekazi majority.

https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/558598/jewish/Does-Jewish-Law-Forbid-Polygamy.htm

It's more a problem of ashkenazi being cultural christians.

 

[Super-Chevy454]

If we're going to play Opression Olympics I can point to examples such as the UN decision that equates Zionism with Racism and the 1973 oil crisis as pretty decisive events. While I'm not so sure about how much the USA left went with its anti-Israel stance (though there are modern examples like the Somali congresswoman), the European left is very anti-Israel, especially the more radical commie factions. There is a lot of bad takes the Labour party in the UK did against Israel, or, a more radical example, the Baader Meinhof gang. Online it was easy to find armchair commies who go with: Israel = USA influence = Capitalism mindset around 10 years ago.
Also usually when something happens with the palestinians you can be sure the "Jewish" old media will take the position against Israel. Such as arguing that getting rockets shot on civilian populace is acceptable and not a big deal. Or that the violent protest on the border are just "peaceful protests".

And to think then Lenin and Trotsky had Jewish ancestry, I wonder what would have been their stances about Israel?

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

Indeed.

On the subject of Omar - and this is a pretty controversial view especially from a conservative - I think she got massively screwed over by the press. Israel and its lobby have a lot of influence on how we in the West run things, which we would not accept from any other country. Heck, I don't think any other country, at any other point in time, has subsidised a foreign power which has the tools it needs to defend itself (Israeli nukes) and has previously attacked that country (USS Liberty). The fact that Ilhan Omar is a completely pants-on-head, tax-and-spend leftist doesn't mean we shouldn't defend her when she's obviously being attacked under false pretences.

Edit - don't politisperg before you have your coffee.

I mentioned Omar due to her twits about Israel having "hypnotized the world" and other autistic remarks that's probably more beneficial to Israel since it removes the validity any legitimate criticisms. As for USA giving money to Israel, while there is some questionably legitimate use for things like joint research and Israel buying military supplies from the USA (thus having the money flow into the USA economy), I can't really fathom why the USA citizens don't do shit about their government giving free money to other countries and footing the bill for defence of European countries (which people keep forgetting).
I will argue that you don't use nukes to defend yourself from anything besides other countries genociding you (so terrorist organisations are still a threat), and that the USS Liberty is almost assuredly one of the many cases of friendly fires in history that happens in every war (particularly due to the non-existance of any sane justification for the act).

And to think then Lenin and Trotsky had Jewish ancestry, I wonder what would have been their stances about Israel?

Probably go against it due to going against the end goal of global communism.

 

[Marshal Mannerheim]

I mentioned Omar due to her twits about Israel having "hypnotized the world" and other autistic remarks that's probably more beneficial to Israel since it removes the validity any legitimate criticisms. As for USA giving money to Israel, while there is some questionably legitimate use for things like joint research and Israel buying military supplies from the USA (thus having the money flow into the USA economy), I can't really fathom why the USA citizens don't do shit about their government giving free money to other countries and footing the bill for defence of European countries (which people keep forgetting).
I will argue that you don't use nukes to defend yourself from anything besides other countries genociding you (so terrorist organisations are still a threat), and that the USS Liberty is almost assuredly one of the many cases of friendly fires in history that happens in every war (particularly due to the non-existance of any sane justification for the act).

1) while that's not the best way for Omar to phrase it I wouldn't say that Israel doesn't exert influence on the West.
2) yeah, and the argument for American support of Israel is that otherwise every Arab country would try and beat Israel's arse. The fact the Samson option exists means that that won't happen.
3) the Liberty was very obviously an American ship.

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

1) while that's not the best way for Omar to phrase it I wouldn't say that Israel doesn't exert influence on the West.
2) yeah, and the argument for American support of Israel is that otherwise every Arab country would try and beat Israel's arse. The fact the Samson option exists means that that won't happen.
3) the Liberty was very obviously an American ship.

1) "Hypnotize" is some comic book villain shit, and every country exerts influence on other countries, whether it's the USA intervention in weaker countries or the EU/China forcing its will to change USA policies.
2) Wasn't it the evangelical thinking Israel needs to exist for the rapture? Anyways this idea is pretty old and it's more logical to support Israel as one of the more stable countries in the region.
3) That's true for every case of friendly fire. War isn't orderly and it's enough for a single misunderstanding to cause an incident. You need a logical explanation of why it wasn't a friendly fire since the risk of attacking the USA is fucking massive.

 

[Marshal Mannerheim]

Wasn't it the evangelical thinking Israel needs to exist for the rapture?

What

 

[Hellbound Hellhound]

Omar is right. Why, exactly, should the US subsidize israel with billions of dollars and a huge hit to our international standing? America is an outlier w/r/t Israel and it's not a good position.

The US hardly subsidizes Israel. The aid that the US gives to Israel accounts for about 1% of Israel's overall GDP, and most of the money (by treaty, if I recall) goes back into the US economy and helps to subsidize American industry. The US definitely benefits from the arrangement, as Israel boasts one of the most innovative economies per capita in the world, and fostering close economic/diplomatic ties with the country has made the US it's biggest customer.

If you really want to complain about wasteful US aid, it would be far more productive to look in the direction of Iraq and Afghanistan, both of whom receive more US aid than Israel does, yet unlike Israel, provide just about nothing in return.

 

[Marshal Mannerheim]

If you really want to complain about wasteful US aid, it would be far more productive to look in the direction of Iraq and Afghanistan, both of whom receive more US aid than Israel does, yet unlike Israel, provide just about nothing in return.

I don't see why the West should help Israel or Afghanistan when we have our own problems to look after.

Let them all beat each other to death over whether the Rashidun Caliphs were divinely guided by Allah or not, but we shouldn't be propping up Ba'athists or sheiks for the sake of oil money.

 

[Imperial Citizen]

I don't see why the West should help Israel or Afghanistan when we have our own problems to look after.

Let them all beat each other to death over whether the Rashidun Caliphs were divinely guided by Allah or not, but we shouldn't be propping up Ba'athists or sheiks for the sake of oil money.

Geopolitics: because another power will gladly step in. If there's some civil strife in a country, China would be more than happy to loan weapons/resources to a government, that government then fails to pay back and China gains more influence by gaining access to that country's resources.

You are right that there are plenty of domestic problems to take care of, but major powers have to pay attention to their sphere of influence, which for the U.S. happens to be the entire world. It is in the best interest of the U.S. to contain any rising powers, because a loss of international power may make it impossible to handle domestic problems due to lack of trade, investment in military development. Basically, the power of the U.S. comes from its strong international dominance, that the game of international relations is often in the U.S.'s favor.

Therefore, what is the best way to maintain dominance? As a democracy, difficult to persuade mass mobilization of the military to voters. But get the local powers to do the fighting? And make it so that they have to buy U.S. manufactured weapons? That's been the win-win solution for the last 30 years. But now we are seeing that long-term funding and vast sums of funding is becoming unpopular with voters. So what could be the next strategy, exclusive drone warfare? Information warfare?