- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Three soldiers pounce on a shepherd sitting outside his sheep pen. They knock him over and then one of them shoots him to death at point-blank range. Fakher Jaber, a father of four, was suspected of involvement in an incident that probably never happened
On the last day of his life, two and a half weeks ago, the shepherd and his wife got up at 5:30 A.M., as usual, and immediately went out together to milk the ewes. With their flock of 120 sheep, their work is never done. Maryam recalls now that they didn’t manage to eat breakfast before the daily Ramadan fast began. After about two hours they finished milking. Fakher took the sheep out to graze and she began to make cheese from the milk, which they sell in Nablus to help make their living.
After he returned the sheep to their pen, Fakher sat down near it, removed the Quran from his pocket and began to read from it. Maryam finished making dinner. She remembers that everything was normal and relatively peaceful that afternoon, in this beleaguered community, living under the constant threat of invasions by settlers. Suddenly Maryam heard shouting. She rushed outside and saw three Israelis in uniform yelling at and wrestling with her husband. One of the men was masked, which led her to believe that they were settlers – of the type that frequently assault the shepherding communities, graze their livestock on the residents’ lands and water their flocks from their wells.
Ah yes, because that strategy worked so wonderfully in 2005 with Gaza.
You mean when they didn’t actually leave? They blockaded Gaza and constantly raided it. So much leaving going on there.
How about actually learning history instead of spouting bullshit. Israel only had to start taking action, after the constant terrorist attacks out of Gaza.
Lmao.
A. Yep I’ve read the history.
B. If they only took action against Gaza after terrorist attacks then why were they in Gaza in the first place?
They blockaded Gaza because they didn’t like the resistance movement actually winning the elections. Instead of trying to work with them they declared war right away. And yes that’s what a blockade is, an act of war. Israel has been at war with Gaza for nearly 20 years by that action alone. More if you count the illegal occupation before.
They don’t get a pass just for being Israel.
Ah yes, revisionist history at its finest. Those are lovely stories you’re inventing there.
Actual facts: Israel agrees to give Gaza independence, pulling out all Jews living there, regardless for how long. Hamas comes into power, declaring their mission to wipe Israel off the map and starts sending terrorist after terrorist into Israel. A blockade is established to limit weapons getting into Gaza.
Lmao. I don’t know how young you are, but I’m not too young to have followed the reports.
And the “takeover” they refer to is Hamas and the Palestinian people enforcing the election result. I’m not the one doing revisionist history here. And that’s generally Israel’s problem. The West isn’t buying their bullshit anymore. Millennials actually don’t like colonialism, as opposed to previous generations that were forced to give it up.
See, you can’t even figure out that they were talking about the border crossing with Israel in that article. The naval blockade (which is actually what people mean when they say blockade) happened later.
The problem with millennials is that they’re falling for too much fake information because it lines up with what they think is their cause. After that they laugh in their ignorance because they think Republicans are the only ones falling for it.
I love how you want to tell me what I mean by blockade. They cut it off to the point they decided how much food the people in Gaza could eat. All for the crime of electing their own government.
Oh I’m sorry, your definition of blockade isn’t a blockade as much as the US border is one.
You also ignored the fact that Hamas was recognized as a terrorist organization back then, too.
Everyone knows that the whole reason for the American Civil War was the Fort Sumter attack. That was when the timeline started, there were no deeper reasons, no history for decades prior. Anyone bringing up things like slavery are just doing it to dilute the crime of the Fort Sumter attack. If only the Confederates had not attacked Fort Sumter, the whole Civil War thing would never have happened.
Also, nobody needs a memory longer than a goldfish’s.
You know what, that tired bullshit argument has a point. Yes, to avoid a repeat of what happened after the Gaza pullout, the Israelis should take some additional corrective steps: do not intentionally prop up extremists to undermine the PA, like they did with Hamas, formally recognize Palestine, sign a treaty, pay reparations, give refugees the right to return, and commit to a policy of non intervention while the Palestinians fight out whatever internal civil war will inevitably follow the establishment of their newly liberated society (like the Irish civil war of 1922-23). That should probably do it. But there might be other concessions that they might have to accept, ultimately fair game in the name of establishing a lasting and just peace after 70 years of oppression of the Palestinians.
That’s great in fairy land. In reality that’s going to cause more terrorist attacks directed at Israel, as said terrorists can now operate freely in the area.
As for reparations, how about Israel work out a plan to ween the West Bank off the Israeli provided resources they’re already heavily reliant on instead?
On the right to return, you’re even more confused. They can return to he west bank all they want. What they actually want is to return to where Israel is and for it to stop existing.
Idealistic bullshit is great online. It gets you plenty of up votes, when applied to reality, you’ll find it quite lacking.
Ok buddy. Tell me what you imagine is the basis for a realistic long term peaceful solution. Because the “idealistic bullshit” that I’m proposing is the stuff that actually brought peace in Europe after two fucking word wars and in places like Ireland after many decades of troubles. I.e., if tried and tested solutions are not realistic, tell me what is. Here’s the catch though: you’re not allowed to argue for ethnic cleansing.
Hmm, last I checked Europe wasn’t a bunch of countries hell bent on wiping one other one off the map. Have you considered that different situations require different solutions?
Oh boy you don’t know European history.
Which country did they all try wiping off the map?
Why do you think that is? Because where Israel is was their home that was stolen. They have stolen more and more territory, even just in recent days they have annexed land that is according to all treaties supposed to be Palestinian land.
Where Israel is was the homes of plenty of Jews that was also stolen from them. Btw, those treaties were only honored by Israel to begin with. Israel had to fight to maintain any land while the surrounding countries tried wiping it off the map, then neglecting the refugees from the wars they started.