U.S. Rep. Rashida Tlaib’s defense of a phrase used by Palestinians in connection with the war between Israel and Hamas is drawing condemnation from critics, including two prominent fellow Democrats — Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel and U.S. Rep. Elissa Slotkin.
“From the River to the Sea!” comes from the same mindset as “Blood and Soil”. They’re both abhorrent and neither should be used.
Sounds closer to “from sea to shining sea, let freedom ring” but no one calls America the beautiful a call for genocide.
You’re not wrong, but the difference is the American genocide is in the past. The Israeli one is happening now.
Fuck Zionists.
There are only two ways to interpret the sentence “from river to sea”, and one is a call for genocide, and the other is a pipe dream. The only scenario that ends without a genocide in some form is the two states solution.
You could have a genocide-free one-state solution. Many states have both Jewish and Islamic citizens. It’s not that hard.
Yes, and that’s the second solution that was mentioned. One secular and fair state.
If the colonists and the current troop movements in Gaza prove anything, the two state solution have been delusional for the last 20 years.
What it does, however is deny the statement “I believe that Israel has a right to exist as a Jewish state”, which is supposedly antisemitic.
Literally neighboring Lebanon manages it
The two state solution will never work. After this conflict, neither side trusts the other enough to share borders any longer. Israel thinks they’re stopping terrorists, but in the process they’re inspiring hundreds more.
A neutral body needs to step in and end the Apartheid state in Israel. Equal rights and protections need to be given for Palestinians, they deserve equal representation in government, and democratic elections need to be held that can be audited by the international community.
Dissolve the Israeli military and set up an international peacekeeping force in the region for at least 10 years. After that, they are allowed nothing more than a self defense force. Codify it into the new constitution that they cannot make any expansionist movements from that point on.
You can have a Jewish state or a democratic state, but you can’t have both.
- John Kerry
yeah nobody calls to “step in and end” anything for a sovereign country. Good luck trying to “step in” to China, Russia etc. Same for Israel. If you want to dissolve the military then you are welcome to go over there and give it a try.
Don’t need to do much else than step back and wait. The israeli military is entirely dependent on western aid.
the two state solution never works when the leadership on the other side has agreed to no recognition, no negotiation, no peace. They were given full representation in their territories of west bank area and gaza strip, their own governments which they elected or were oppressed by caused a lot of their sufferings. I do realize that some control is lacking, like military and control of their borders, but were’ talking about representation here, every single member of Hamas is from Gaza(or Qatar? or Egypt?). Please tell me what will your peace keeping force do when one side decides to let a thousand weapons into their state freely and then openly fire these weapons at civilian targets. What will your peace keeping force do that will be so unique and peaceful in this situation? I disagree with the details of how Israel is responding, but not their right to defend themselves against rocket attacks. There is already a peace keeping force in the area, they’re obviously not doing something to your liking and it would be more constructive to hear what you would do differently rather than just replace them with another authority who will have to solve the same problems.
Arabas were trying to “obliterate” jews from israel before there was ever a state or an army, what do you think think the ayotollah was meeting with hitler about pre-1948? Was Britain not a neutral peace keeping force in those times?
Lets make a thought experiment, lets say that Britain or your peace keeping force suddenly decided to show up in 1948 after the constitution of Israel was drafted that allowed all arabs to be a part of the new state. Would that have stopped the arab league from declaring war on Israel? Ah the peace keeping force is here, they are determined to save the life of every citizen in Israel and allow them to continue living here? These goals directly conflict with the goals of all the arab countries who declared war in Israel. Do you think that your peace keepign force would not be an additional target for their attacks if you decide to protect the citizens of Israel? I say citizens, because not every citizen of Israel is jewish, there are bedouins, arabs, christians, and muslims living there and this is a fact.
I think you are missing a key motivation for Hamas and its supporters is that they are no interested in the present or hte future. They are trying to make “palestine” great again, and take it to the past (but not too far back, only a past where they were living there). There is no peaceful co-existence with someone, they want to live where they are living and banish them from their sights. They refuse to share. Apparantly it is not just politics or basic raw human emotion or greed or selfishness or hate, it is literally a part of their religion, at least for Hamas, that they refuse to share things with people who want to live peacefully with jews. Is that not written in their constitution?
I don’t think that would work much better to be honest, because the groups would still hold resentment against eachother for a long time after. I fear it’d end up like what often has happened in post-colonial states with borders arbitrarily drawn by outside powers, where power struggles follow ethnic lines and frequent civil wars involve genocide. If an outside power even could impose that (and one should consider that Israel is almost definitely nuclear armed), then that power could also set up two or more states and enforce a buffer between them, or with power sufficiently balanced between the two sides as to deter full scale war.
The day the Palestinians puts down their weapons will be the day peace begins. The day Israel puts down their weapons will be the day all Israelis are massacred. That is the difference between the two sides - coexistence vs “from the river to the sea”
The west bank Palestinians didn’t seem to be armed please do explain why there are colonists and checkpoints popping up all over their land?
Peace will not come from israel, only destruction. They are Nazi’s expanding their lebensraum for their “chosen people”.
As a Jewish person who was able to escape antisemitism in Russia in the 1980s, the state of Israel should not exist. There shouldn’t be a Jewish state.It was taken away from Palestinians and given to Jews in order to keep Jewish refugees from ending up in England and the U.S. Its birth is based on antisemitism and is perpetuated on antisemitism. U.S. Christians are trying to fulfill the end times prophecy. They want us to be sacrificial lambs.
IDK why you’d want two Palestines but ok.
Two state solution also involves either genocide or pipe dream? There are so many Israel-backed settlers in Palestine.
Why would it be hard for the illegal settlers to be removed? The Israelis managed to do just that in Gaza 15 years ago.
Two State solution is a dead joke. The only way forward is a one state solution and Truth and Reconciliation tribunals, similar to SA. Israel needs to return to being Palestine, and needs to be a non secular state.
Anything else and the genocide of the Palestinians by Israel will continue.
You sure you meant non-secular?
and needs to be a non secular state.
This is where you lose me. Religion and government should not mix. No exceptions.
I think this was a misstatement/typo.
Maybe they were thinking “secular” and “non-religious” when typing and ended up with “non-secular”
or maybe they just believe in “from the river to the sea”.
Typos are antisemitic!
The day the Palestinians puts down their weapons will be the day peace begins. The day Israel puts down their weapons will be the day all Israelis are massacred. That is the difference between the two sides - coexistence vs “from the river to the sea”. Don’t forget who started this war. Jews were already genocided once, so STFU while we defend ourselves after this latest attempt. Nobody else will protect us, so we’re doing it ourselves.
“Jews were already genocided once” Right, I forgot that gave them the right to commit one free genocide themselves.
(/s, in case that wasn’t clear)
so STFU while we defend ourselves after this latest attempt.
What Israel is doing right now isn’t “defense” it’s vengeance.
Id sure like that defense to not involve so many dead children and journalists.
How is it so hard to understand that “from the river to the sea” is about a one state solution? A state for jews and arabs to live in peace like they did before british colonization. Nobody wants to read shit from palestinian resistance scholars or fighters, they just want to project religious extremism when in reality Israel is a religious ethnostate
That’s an old terrorist chant, like PLO old.
