BeaverFever

Not true at all. Threats exist along the entire North American coast, not only from Russian and Chinese submarines and spy ships but also smugglers, poachers polluters etc. and submarines have been used for monitoring all of these Furthermore the arctic isn’t entirely under ice there are many ice-free areas at least part of the year and that will only accelerate with climate change. That will mean new surface traffic to monitor, both military and commercial Guarding the arctic and northern passage also means guarding the southern approaches such as Labrador Sea and Hudson Strait which are not under polar ice They lurk off the North American coast, in international waters, especially spy ships disguised as commercial vessels. I thought you said NATO doesn’t need Canada. Now you’re saying NATO is being destroyed from within because Canada isn’t making its contribution? You’re just trolling now. The only people undermining NATO from within are Putin’s useful idi0ts in the Republican Party. Long before the 2022 invasion fifth columnists like Tucker Carlson was already actively trying to publicly discredit and destroy NATO.

What woke 2SLGBTQIA++ left is fighting in Ukraine? NONE Putin is winning because the Republican Party was actively aiding and abetting him by cutting off aid. Stop talking like a Retarded Trump supporting troll

Kremlin is not going to attack a NATO force ever. They might invade territory with no NATO force present however, calculating that NATO isn’t going to draw first blood with a nuclear attack. Ukraine is a perfect example. Had NATO troops been there in 2022 Russia wouldn’t have invaded. But since NATO wasn’t there, they also knew we were not going to nuke them over it since they didn’t spill a drop of NATO blood.

1) Coastal defence is still a valuable asset 2) Projecting power overseas includes projecting power on your enemies coastlines and SSKs are more capable in coastal /littoral waters than SSNs 3) when submerged SSKs are significantly stealthier than SSNs7 4) Several SSK subs including the new Swedish-Dutch C71 “Expeditionary” SSK under development meet or exceed a range of > 21,000 km and endurance of 70 days (including snorkelling time), meanwhile the German Type 212 can remain submerged for up to 21 days without snorkelling. Obviously the need to snorkel for several hours every few weeks is a limitation in some scenarios including extended patrols under polar ice. But I wouldn’t say TOTALLY useless

I guess my views are left of centre but I’ve never called myself “a leftist”. And anyways the left haven’t always been anti/military. The political left from across the western world were the first to fight Hitler’s forces in the Spanish Civil War as foreign fighters in international brigades, much as many foreign fighters flock to Ukraine today. All of this was done through labour unions and left wing political organnizations with no support or acknowledgement from any western capitalist country’s government. Meanwhile many influential people on the political right were still playing footsie with him, same as many on the right are playing footsie with Putin now. The left only became officially pacifist in the 60s and hopefully have now been woken from their slumber by Putin’s aggression. Not necessarily. It depends who is doing the negotiations and what their agenda is.Much to the chagrin of many on the right, trade agreements increasingly have other beneficiaries beside multinationals and the business lobby, such as *gasp* pollution controls and environmental protections. This is the paradox of military deterrence: if the equipment purchased works it goes unused. Does anyone believe that if NATO had unilaterally disarmed at the height of the cold war, nuclear deterrence alone would have preserved the peace? NATO is not going to start WW3 if USSR commits a Sudetenland-style annexation of a small undefended territory where there are no NATO boots on the ground, if an entire NATO division had been stationed there and was attacked, that might trigger events that escalate to a nuclear war hence the conventional force is deterrent because it is a clear tripwire for the nuclear deterrent while also having the ability to respond to smaller local crises and skirmishes without having to resort to a nuclear option I wouldn’t say TOTALLY useless. but they should be reevaluated given recent amd forthcoming uncrewed and autonomous options

And yet when we were in a similar situation with Trudeau the Elder back in the 1970s we hit 2% of GDP after brow-beating from our allies. During a trade mission to West Germany the Chancellor told him “no tanks, no trade” and Canada soon afterwards bought the Leopard 1 fleet. A fleet of CF-18s came soon afterwards. So perhaps there are still levers to pull and consequences to be had.

As predicted another non-announcement that contains no new information and no details on where the year 2032 came from….maybe that’s when they’re expecting to next have a legitimate shot at getting elected and they want to be able to say on the campaign trail “we were on track to reach the 2% target and PP broke it!”

Honestly unless we hear big announcements about fixing the personnel shortage, which is an absolute crisis, all the announcements about new procurements are meaningless, as you suggest. Pay raises, signing bonuses, retention bonuses, and greater investment in housing, childcare and other quality of life issues will help address the problem and also count towards the 2% goal. We’ve seen some of this mentioned in the latest defence update but nothing on pay or bonuses. Supposedly there will be more big announcements today….probably more window dressing.

LMAO that’s exactly what the Taliban says too. Every time you open your vile ugly mouth you prove me correct. You are the Christian Taliban, keep your bullshit superstitions to yourself and stop forcing it on others

Yeah, its a fact that nearly all of the poorest states most dependent upon federal money transfers are red states and nearly all of the wealthiest states that contribute more in federal taxes than they receive in federal spending are mostly blue states So not surprised to hear the Taliban (Christian and non-Christian, American and non-American) have their hands out.

What is the difference between teaching the contributions and struggles of homosexuals and teaching “gay pride”? As a parent with kids in a public school, the latter is just the name for the former

I’ve not heard the US refuses to sell us SSNs. It’s mostly Canadian lack of interest. We could always try to buy British or French if we really wanted to.

We’re still along way off from any submarines and today’s announcement feels like a non-announcement. . We’ve gone from a pledge to “explore” buying subs to a pledge to “taking the first step towards” buying subs…and a formal Request For Information from potential suppliers is being posted. What’s the difference? Given the 42-year timeline from the 2008 kickoff of the Canadian Surface Combatant project to the final ship delivery planned for 2050, Im not certain Ill see an operational fleet in my lifetime. According to chat GPT the AIP sub currently in operation with the longest submerged duration is the German Type 212 which can remain submerged for approximately 3 weeks depending upon various factors then it must snorkel and run on diesel for 3-5 hours to recharge hydrogen fuel cells. And the approximate travel time from Halifax/Esquimalt to the arctic circle is 8-10 days depending on the departure port. Presumably future models will improve. (Edit: time to arctic OCEAN as a opposed to arctic circle is longer, 14-17.5 days) I’m not sure what the appropriate duration of an arctic patrol should be but it seems AIP subs could be used for relatively short patrols with only couple of weeks spent completely below ice without having to find a place to snorkel, and there would at least 1 snorkel done after arriving in the arctic and one prior to returning home

No your claims are completely false and you are a known antisemitic Putin propagandist

Now you sound like a dweeb with your unrealistic genocidal fantasies but you’ve made clear on many threads on many topics you are a fascist with zero concept of principles such as rights and the law.

The first step is to actually WANT a lasting peace and be willing to make concessions for it. Second the illegal settlements which Israel continues to build are a form of violence and the extremist settlers in those settlements who terrorize local Palestinians with the help if the IDF are also violence. Bulldozing home, stealing drinking water, et etc are all forms of violence. Killing scores of civilians in reckless “revenge” airstrikes that have more to do with keeping a 10:1 kill score than protecting anyone is arguably also violence. BOTH SIDES need to do their part and the current regimes of Hamas and Netanyahu have no interest in doing so.

Of course the settlements are a source of outrage and violence. Your argument only exemplifies that they are not the one and only cause of violence or the original cause of violence. When Jews first started immigrating into Palestine in large numbers in the first half of the 20th century the land wasn’t empty there were people already there and there was violence on all sides and today they are the most glaring proof that Israel has rarely if ever been genuinely interested in peace. You cam draw a straight line from the Nakba to the illegal settlements in the OT During the foundational events of the Nakba in 1948, approximately half of Palestine's predominantly Arab population, or around 750,000 people,[6]were expelled from their homes or made to flee through various violent means, at first by Zionist paramilitaries, and after the establishment of the State of Israel, by its military. Dozens of massacres targeted Palestinian Arabs and over 500 Arab-majority towns, villages, and urban neighborhoods were depopulated,[7] with many of these being either completely destroyed or repopulated by Jews and given new Hebrew names. By the end of the war, 78% of the total land area of the former Mandatory Palestine was controlled by Israel. Its relevant to point out that even as far back as 1917 the Brits were acknowledging how their double dealing had crated an impossible situation that would inevitably screw over one group in favour of the other and that they had zero expectation for things to work out well. So? I don’t see how you think that helps your argument. Just help illustrate the massive amount of Jewish immigration What does that have to do with it, really? In the early 20th century the Arabs were the ones the Brits were referring to as the indigenous people although the Brits viewed themselves as the rightful owners by conquest according to imperialist and colonialist ideas that people today don’t accept. Not that it matters now though. Both people are there now and neither is going anywhere so they have to learn to share. The injustices continue today. The entire endeavour from 1917 has been a constant series of injustices and cycles of violence. I don’t think any of that suggests life in Gaza (or Jordan for that matter) is great or that Gazans should be satisfied woth their oppression. Besides Jordan isn’t hostage to another country who controls its borders and economy from the outside, I don’t know of many people who would not want sovereignty and freedom simply because it wouldn’t improve their HDI. I also don’t think you can draw conclusions about the state of Gaza based on data about Palestine as a whole. To the contrary we have to STOP listening to what the terrorists and extremists have to say. It has nothing to do with the solution. As I said terrorism is the SYMPTOM not the DISEASE. Extremists don’t want peace, they often don’t even want victory, they want eternal conflict because that is when they are someone important and powerful. There are extremists in the Israeli cabinet too. The moderates on both sides just have to restart a peace process as Rabin and Arafat did and commit to sticking to it no matter what, with the full knowledge that extremists are going to try to derail it through everything from terrorist attacks to inciting unrest via stunts like the one Ariel Sharon pulled. “Anywhere in the world?” That’s a big claim for any country, much less one that officially declares itself to exist exclusively for one specific culture t's not random acts of racism by private individuals, its institutionalized policy and they’re still mostly segregated. Only about 8% of Arab Israelis live in mixed Arab/Jewish towns. They also have much lower socioeconomic status, living standards etc. In both policy and practice Israel falls well below what western countries would consider acceptable. The Many Civil and Human Rights Challenges Facing Israel’s Palestinian Citizens https://carnegieendowment.org/posts/2024/02/the-many-civil-and-human-rights-challenges-facing-israels-palestinian-citizens?lang=en Peace for Israelis. Palestinians in the OT would still be stateless people on their own land, under occupation, oppression, violence from settler militias, land theft, water theft, arbitrary shut off of utilities etc. The UN Partition Plan was an unfair deal that exclusively benefited Israel at the expense of the incumbent Arabs. Perhaps with the benefit of hindsight we can say its the best offer the Arabs would ever get but no reasonable person in such a circumstance would accept it. Look how upset Americans get ant Mexican immigration into the southern states now imagine how Americans would react if the UN partitioned the southern states and gave Americans less than half…..and the southwestern states used to be part of Mexico until USA annexed them in fairly recent history, not thousands of years ago Fact check: Oslo WAS accepted and as a result the PLO became the Palestinian Authority and officially recognized Israel. It was Israel who effectively rejected it when Israeli extremists then assassinated their own Prime Minister Rabin as a result and Israel has essentially been under hardliner anti-peace governments ever since. Many in Netanyahu’s government have been criticized for their comments seeming to support Rabin’s assassination among other things. Both sides are to blame. Hostilities beget hostilities. Israel cultivated a Hamas controlled Gaza to neutralize Palestinian Authority. The entire future of the region doesn’t have to he dictated by the actions of the Hamas organization, that gives them all the power. The peace process and dealing with terrorist groups whose aim is to prevent any peace should be 2 different things. 1) I believe DNA test have shown that Palestinians and the indigenous Hebrews are closely related and equally descended from the ancient inhabitants…Ashkenazi and Sephardic jews less so as they have mixed European ancestry, in some cases heavily mixed. Therefore it’s hard to portray the Palestinians as colonizers. At any rate, the colonial powers were the British and before them the Turks, not the Palestinians. 2) From understanding of “decolonizing’l it doesn’t involve mass migration from abroad and I think is supposed to be grass roots bottom-up anti-establishment. Maybe that fits the preIsrael Zionist movements but now Zionism is pretty much the powerful establishment position of Israel, the UN and the western powers. There was violence long before there was war, “who started the war” and even when exactly it started can very subjective. Thats why it usually doesn’t matter much “who started it”. Exactly who has rights of return and how many would need to be worked out and negotiated, certainly it should be limited to some population of immediate descendants. I don’t think that’s entirely correct. The was displacement from the various uprisings and riots on both sides throughout the 1920s and 1930s and continued on right up through the 1947-48 civil war, which immediately preceded the 1948 Arab- Israeli War between Israel and the neighbouring Arab states. You are correct that initially from the late 19th century/early 20th century the displacement was initially economic with Jewish organizations, primarily in Europe, raising large amounts of money to legally purchase farmland from absentee owners who either lived abroad or in urban areas. This resulted in the displacement of many Arab tenant farmers. In addition the Jewish immigrants brought with them western education, technology, machinery, new exotic imports of all types, new modern ways of doing business etc so not only were they more efficient competitors but they transformed the economy to something new that was disruptive to the existing established Palestinian businesses, with some relocating due to resulting hardships Texas is a big place there must be plenty of land to share with Mexican immigrants. And they shouldn’t have any concern that the immigrants are openly working towards a goal of establishing their own sovereign country right? It’s not “sharing” when an occupying empire is forcing you to give it away against your will. Land and water and control over them wee scarce enough for there to be concern. While perhaps some people could enlighten you what does that have to do with the topic? The rule of law is not applied via a popularity contest and rights aren’t a prize awarded only to those with the most appealing culture…not that I find the culture of extremist violent settlers or ultra-Orthodox jews who literally have sex through a hole in a sheet all that appealing.

YOUR version of history that you are reciting here is one-sided because you are selectively choosing to omit inconvenient facts. 1) That was long after Britain reneged on its promise for an Arab state in Palestine with the 1917 Balfour declaration despite the fact that Arabs were 94% of the population at that time, the Jewish Insurgency against the British mandate which started in 1944 and lasted until 1948, a Jewish terrorist group bombing the British mandate HQ killing 91 people, and decades of violence between Arabs and Isrealis with atrocities committed by both sides since before 1900. Britain simply wanted to extricate itself by handing to the UN. Regarding the 1917 Balfour declaration, which was public, its publication banned by the British in Palestine. In 1919 correspondence between outgoing British Foreign Secretary Balfour and his successor: 1919, Balfour to Curzon‘The weak point of our position is of course that in the case of Palestine we deliberately and rightly decline to accept the principle of self-determination.’ PRO. FO 371/4179. 1919 Curzon, to Balfour warns: [Chair of British Zionist movement] Weizmann contemplates a Jewish state, a Jewish nation, a subordinate population of Arabs, [and that Weizmann was]…trying to effect this behind the screen and under the shelter of British trusteeship.Ingramsp58 1919 Balfour to Curzon Aug 11th ‘in Palestine we do not propose even to go through the form of consulting the wishes of the present inhabitants of the country, though the American Commission has been going through the form of asking what they are.….The Four Great Powers are committed to Zionism. And Zionism, be it right or wrong, good or bad, is rooted in age-long traditions, in present needs, in future hopes, of far profounder import than the desires and prejudices of the 700,000 Arabs who now inhabit that ancient land…….What I have never been able to understand how it can be harmonised with the declaration [Anglo-French of 1918]… or the instructions to the Commission of Enquiry. ………. In short, so far as Palestine is concerned, the Powers have made no statement of fact which is not admittedly wrong, and no declaration of policy which, at least in the letter, they have not always intended to violate. Ingrams p73 See Nutting Then in 1922, in the British House of Parliament: 1922 LORD ISLINGTON moving the motion on the Palestine Mandate in the House of Lords which condemned the Mandate by 60 – 29 votes moved‘that the Mandate for Palestine in its present form is inacceptable to this House, because it directly violates the pledges made by His Majesty’s Government to the people of Palestine in the Declaration of October, 1915, and again in the Declaration of November, 1918, and is, as at present framed, opposed to the sentiments and wishes of the great majority of the people of Palestine; that, therefore, its acceptance by the Council of the League of Nations should be postponed until such modifications have therein been effected as will comply with pledges given by His Majesty’s Government……, 1922 Meeting at Balfour’s home in London. Foreign Secretary Balfour and Prime Minister Lloyd George confirm verbally to Weizmann that ‘by the Declaration they always meant an eventual Jewish state’. Colonial Secretary, Churchill [responsible for Palestine] also present at the meeting when Lloyd George tells Churchill that ‘we’ must not allow such a thing as representative government to happen in Palestine. Sahar Huneidi, A Broken Trust p 59 Even future Israeli founding father David Ben Gurion said in 1947 Britain was responsible for the tragedy of Palestine, the cause of much war, suffering and the displacement of peoples as well as posing a continuing threat to world peace. The Balfour Declaration in both its parts [promising a Jewish homeland and to protect the interests of the Arab residents of Palestine] was not capable of implementation and the end of the Mandate was humiliating and irresponsible. Anthony Parsons (former UK Ambassador to Iran), “The Middle East”, in Peter Byrd (Ed.), British foreign policy under Thatcher, 1988 And so on https://balfourproject.org/a-few-quotes/ Regarding Arab objections to Jewish settlers from Europe displacing Arabs, Churchill said in 1937 I do not admit that the dog in the manger has the final right to the manger, though he may have lain there for a very long time I do not admit that right. I do not admit for instance that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been to those people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race or at any rate a more worldly-wise race, to put it that way, has come in and taken their place. I do not admit it. I do not think the Red Indians had any right to say, 'American continent belongs to us and we are not going to have any of these European settlers coming in here'. They had not the right, nor had they the power."[72] As for Arabs rejecting the UN model, in the 30 years since Balfour, Arabs were reduced from 94% to 67% of the population with thousands displaced due to massive Jewish immigration but were offered only 48% of the territory in the UN plan which would have called for many more Arabs to be displaced from their homes located in the new Israeli territory So? After decades of violence and displacement. Israel wants to eliminate the possibility of a state of Palestine is that any different, The Jewish terrorist groups Irgun Lehi and many in the current government who revere them seek to even eliminate the Palestinian occupied territories. They have their own “river to the sea” agenda and unlike PLO which eventually became the Palestinian Authority and officially recognized the state of Israel to exist 30 years ago, Israel still has not done the same, continues to aggressively and illegally colonize Palestinian territory and materially support extremist settler militias in the OT which are effectively terrorist organizations. What a dishonest description. He was not “a guy going for a walk”. He was an infamous convicted war criminal that had abetted a bloody massacre of women and children in a refugee camp, and in planned stunt he disrupted prayer at the Palestinians’ holiest site with an entourage of heavily armed body guards, with the deliberate intention of triggering unrest in order to destabilize peace talks. Gaza is often described as an open air prison as Isreal controls everything and everyone moving in and out on all sides including utilities, basic necessities, fresh water and even the airwaves. As in the west bank, sometimes these have been shut off arbitrarily for no apparent reason, seemingly sometimes because some low-ranking Israeli official simply felt like f-cking with the Palestinians that day. Israel has referred to their policy regarding indefinite occupation of Palestinians as “mowing the lawn” (or mowing the grass depending upon the translation). Look it up. Basically their preferred policy is to continue occupation until such time as the OT can be fully annexed into Israel proper, endure the inevitable terrorist attacks that causes, and then occasionally “mow the lawn” with overwhelming retaliatory strikes as needed to keep things manageable. Israel has calculated that Hamas could be managed and that a “divide and conquer” approach was preferable to having Palestinians in both OTs united under the more moderate and secular Palestinian Authority. At best, October 7 shows this policy was a gross miscalculation or at least no longer sustainable in the new world order with a newly emboldened Russia-China-Iran axis moving against the West. Maybe my eyes are failing me but I don’t see Gaza listed at your link I don’t forget it, it’s just not relevant to Israels continued colonization of land and support of settler violence. Has was elected in ONE election 20 years ago because they presented themselves as a newly moderate “party of change” in the new Gaza and then afterwards reverted back to their true form and canceled all elections. They were elected by the parents and grandparents of the children being killed today. There is no basis in any law or concept of human rights that sanctions the killing of civilians or annexation of territory as collective punishment on an entire society for the acts of the government they elected, much less the children grandchildren of those civilians I acknowledge the many many many countless atrocities committed by Palestinian terrorists and even that their atrocities are arguably offensive than the cruelty and injustice that Israel has inflicted on Palestinians. But it’s a moot point with regard to the fact that cruelty abounds on both sides, both sides are hardened extremists and no acts of cruelty can justify illegal annexation or colonization just as it doesn’t justify terrorism. Before Israelis had their own country and military they also resorted to terrorism as their primary means of force,, now they have more power and options to use other means of violence that are more palatable to western sensibilities like arbitrarily shutting off drinking water, utilities, military action and using proxy forces like the settler militias for the less palatable violence. Everywhere in the world, terrorism is a symptom of the current conditions, not the cause. Always has been. I guess you didn’t read the section of your link titled “Legal and Political Status”: Many Arab citizens feel that the state, as well as society at large, not only actively limits them to second-class citizenship, but treats them as enemies, affecting their perception of the de jure versus de facto quality of their citizenship.[285] The joint document The Future Vision of the Palestinian Arabs in Israel, asserts: "Defining the Israeli State as a Jewish State and exploiting democracy in the service of its Jewishness excludes us, and creates tension between us and the nature and essence of the State." And then there’s a whole separate wiki page on “Racism in Israel” Racism against Arab citizens by Israeli Jews Vandalized grave. The graffiti says "death to Arabs" (מוות לערבים, mavet laArabim). See also: Anti-Arabism in Israel Racism against Arab citizens of Israel on the part of the Israeli state and some Israeli Jews has been identified by critics in personal attitudes, the media, education, immigration rights, housing segregation, and social life. Nearly all such characterizations have been denied by the state of Israel. The Or Commission, set up to explain the October 2000 unrest in many Israeli Arab communities found, According to the 2004 U.S. State Department Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for Israel and the Occupied Territories, the Israeli government had done "little to reduce institutional, legal, and societal discrimination against the country's Arab citizens".[10] The 2005 U.S. Department of State report on Israel wrote: "[T]he government generally respected the human rights of its citizens; however, there were problems in some areas, including ... institutional, legal, and societal discrimination against the country's Arab citizens."[11] Amd from Israeli newspaper Haaretz Don’t Call It a ‘Housing Crisis’: The Discriminatory Plight of Israeli Arabs Arabs in Israel find it next to impossible to acquire a home, and that’s not due to the same housing crisis that impacts nearly all Israeli citizens. It’s a different one: discrimination …. https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/business/real-estate/2023-04-11/ty-article/.premium/dont-call-it-a-housing-crisis-the-discriminatory-plight-of-israeli-arabs/00000187-526f-dde0-afb7-7e7f62cc0000 Clear him out’: Palestinian tenants struggle to rent in west Jerusalem In this divided city, an Arabic name can severely limit the ability to find a home – and anti-discrimination laws don’t cover private housing https://amp.theguardian.com/cities/2019/feb/07/clear-him-out-palestinian-tenants-struggle-to-rent-in-west-jerusalem Lesser citizens Palestinian citizens of Israel, who comprise about 19% of the population, face many forms of institutionalized discrimination. In 2018, discrimination against Palestinians was crystallized in a constitutional law which, for the first time, enshrined Israel exclusively as the “nation state of the Jewish people”. The law also promotes the building of Jewish settlements and downgrades Arabic’s status as an official language. The report documents how Palestinians are effectively blocked from leasing on 80% of Israel’s state land, as a result of racist land seizures and a web of discriminatory laws on land allocation, planning and zoning. The situation in the Negev/Naqab region of southern Israel is a prime example of how Israel’s planning and building policies intentionally exclude Palestinians. Since 1948 Israeli authorities have adopted various policies to “Judaize” the Negev/Naqab, including designating large areas as nature reserves or military firing zones, and setting targets for increasing the Jewish population. This has had devastating consequences for the tens of thousands of Palestinian Bedouins who live in the region. Thirty-five Bedouin villages, home to about 68,000 people, are currently “unrecognized” by Israel, which means they are cut off from the national electricity and water supply and targeted for repeated demolitions. As the villages have no official status, their residents also face restrictions on political participation and are excluded from the healthcare and education systems. These conditions have coerced many into leaving their homes and villages, in what amounts to forcible transfer. Decades of deliberately unequal treatment of Palestinian citizens of Israel have left them consistently economically disadvantaged in comparison to Jewish Israelis. This is exacerbated by blatantly discriminatory allocation of state resources: a recent example is the government’s Covid-19 recovery package, of which just 1.7% was given to Palestinian local authorities. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/02/israels-apartheid-against-palestinians-a-cruel-system-of-domination-and-a-crime-against-humanity/ Benjamin Netanyahu says Israel is ‘not a state of all its citizens’ PM has been accused of demonising Israeli Arabs in lead-up to April election Benjamin Netanyahu has said Israel is “not a state of all its citizens”, in a reference to the country’s Arab population. In comments on Instagram, the prime minister went on to say all citizens, including Arabs, had equal rights, but he referred to a deeply controversial law passed last year declaring Israelthe nation state of the Jewish people. “Israel is not a state of all its citizens,” he wrote in response to criticism from an Israeli actor, Rotem Sela. “According to the basic nationality law we passed, Israel is the nation state of the Jewish people – and only it.… Netanyahu has been accused of demonising Israeli Arabs, who make up about 17% of the population, in an attempt to boost rightwing turnout in elections due on 9 April. He has continually warned that his opponents will receive the support of Arab parties and that they will make significant concessions to the Palestinians. https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2019/mar/10/benjamin-netanyahu-says-israel-is-not-a-state-of-all-its-citizens Israeli Arabs Have No Choice but to Build Illegally' Study released by the Dirasat - Arab Center for Law and Policy highlights obstacles faced by Israeli Arabs wishing to build homes; about a quarter of Arab communities have neither a local nor privatized master plan. Israel's Arabs are forced to build illegal housing due to the government's refusal to recognize many of their communities as official towns or to grant them permits for legal construction https://www.haaretz.com/2010-07-29/ty-article/israeli-arabs-have-no-choice-but-to-build-illegally/0000017f-e0eb-d804-ad7f-f1fbd6740000 Palestinian permits blocked, thousands of Israeli housing units approved Only 32 construction plans and permits were approved for Palestinians in Area C in 2019-2020, while over 18,000 plans and permits were approved for Israelis during the same period, according to data collected by left-wing NGO Peace Now and published on Sunday. Between 2009 and 2018, only 98 construction permits for Palestinians were issued out of the 4,422 requests for permits that were filed. https://m.jpost.com/arab-israeli-conflict/palestinian-permits-blocked-thousands-of-israeli-housing-units-approved-657445 We will not go away’: Israeli demolitions leave Bedouin homeless Bedouin erect tents only for Israeli forces to return and dismantle them in Negev village earmarked for clearance In early May, Israeli authorities demolished 350 structures in the community, 47 of them homes, leaving hundreds of children homeless. In the shadow of the conflict in Gaza, the government described this action as “an important move of sovereignty and governance”. The Bedouin erect makeshift tents to provide shelter for their families. However, every three days Israeli forces arrive with a sizeable police presence, dismantling the temporary homes, uprooting trees that had offered shade and issuing threats of arrest. The far-right national security minister, Itamar Ben-Gvir, has openly endorsed and pushed for the demolition of Palestinian homes, both within Israel and in the occupied Palestinian territory. More than a year ago he shared a video on social media celebrating the demolition of Palestinian Bedouin homes in the Negev. Last month he said the Wadi al-Khalil homes were “illegal constructions” and issued a warning to anyone who “violates the law in the Negev”. He said the destruction was “an important step” indicating that the government’s authority would not be challenged. https://amp.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jun/06/israeli-demolitions-bedouins-homeless-negev Israel razes entire Bedouin village to expand a highway https://www.972mag.com/israel-razes-bedouin-village-wadi-al-khalil/ And so on Nope, true None of that matters it isn’t about who you think is nicer or has fewer warts. Personally if I had to choose between being stranded is Israel or stranded in the OT I would of course choose Israel. But there is nothing that justifies annexation occupation oppression or colonization just as there is nothing that justifies terrorism And this narrative that the Israeli government is just a bunch of nice guys who only want peace and to be left alone nothing more is false The idea that Palestinian terrorism could end while Israeli illegal occupation and colonization or outright annexation can continue is unrealistic in the extreme And Israel CONTINUES to take illegal actions as noted in the OP that are not at all defensive or in the spirit of peace. They are acts of overt hostile and violent aggression that have nothing to do with October 7 or defending against terrorism, that in fact make peace less likely and further the cycle of violence And the Israeli government knows this Then you object to the existence of the state of Israel entirely because the Right of Return for Jewish people is the entire purpose for founding the state of Israel, including especially the descendants of ancestors who fled the land thousands of years ago or whose ancestors converted to Judaism generations ago and have never even lived in the area To accept the right of return for Jewish people from centuries or millennia ago but not that of Palestinians who were displaced in the 20th centuries is extremely hypocritical Besides most refugees have the right to return to their home countries that is the norm. There are conventions and prohibitions against creating stateless people. Israel is unique in that many refugees were not recognized enfranchised by Israel before they were forced to flee and Israel won’t let them return to their homes whether in Israel proper or the OT See earlier comments challenging this claim Israel abuses that claim and uses it to justify continued land grabs and oppression like shutting off water, diverting essential drinking water from Palestinian villages for the swimming pools and lawns of illegal settlements to electricity The wall is only one factor amd Haaretz reported, "[t]he security fence is no longer mentioned as the major factor in preventing suicide bombings, mainly because the terrorists have found ways to bypass it."[7 Nobody is saying they shouldn’t have protection I turn the question back on you since Arab Israelis only have 3% to 4% of land in Israel proper. Palestinians make up nearly 50% of the entire population in Israel and the OT and their number is growing faster. Should they not have at least 50% of the total land? Remember they were more than of the are’s population before massive Jewish immigration started in the early 20th century

That is a very one-sided version of history. It is both sides l, not one/ sided. For example Israeli violence against Palestinians also predates the state of Israel. In fact before they had the luxury of a nation state with a military there were multiple Zionist terrorist groups who massacred Arab villagers and British troops. Their leaders ultimately became some of Israel’s founding fathers. And the settler militia violence in the West Bank borders on terrorism. The reason that no Palestinian state was formed in1948-1967 is because the British renegged on their promise to create one. The PLO was founded in 1964 because Arab-Jew violence including forced displacements and unauthorized settlements first occurred decades before that, with both sides committing atrocities Also the “multiple offers of land for peace” is also misleading as as they were often bad faith offers, or offers for a small fraction of their land in return for permanently forfeiting their rights to any further claims. Imagine if someone took a million dollars from you and made you an offer to return only $100 if you forfeit your claim to the rest. And none of those offers were for a Palestinian state, they were mostly offers for continued Israeli occupation and illegal settlement in exchange for slightly more land than they currently have…and sometimes slightly less land. I will remind you that the last Israeli PM to make a genuine peace offer to Palestine was assassinated by Israeli hardliners who have basically remained in power ever since. I will also remind you that the Palestinian Authority has officially recognized Israel for decades now its right to exist but Israel has never reciprocated The fact of the matter is both sides have followed the tit-for-tat retaliation with the evil done by one side begetting the evil of the other to the point where today both have become unreasonable extremists who for generations have committed unspeakable acts and hav also suffered unspeakable acts. As westerners raised to respect state authority over vigilantism, we are naturally inclined to see bombing a family with a F-16 as inherently more legitimate than bombing the same family with a suicide vest and that is not always so in the case of Israel. Similarly we consider acts of terrorism to be more heinous than acts of brutal state oppression and occupation. People with state militaries can use their armed forces for violence but those without a state have to resort to terrorism as the proto-Israelis themselves did in the before before the Israeli state was formed Furthermore the withdrawal from Gaza - by a hardliner Israeli PM and war criminal who deliberately triggered the second intifada to derail earlier peace talks - was not a peace gesture. It was an attempt to and contain the Palestinian Authority to the West Bank and turn Gaza into an open air prison. The Israelis calculated that Hamas could be managed and was a better option to have in Gaza than having the Palestinian Authority in 2 places and it was easier to secure Gaza from the outside than from the inside. As point of fact they do not enjoy full rights nor high living standards, they are second class citizens more akin to Blacks in the Jim Crow South, many were forcefully displaced during the wars and had their land confiscated with no right to return, some of these “citizens” live in unsanctioned shanty towns that the Israeli government sometimes bulldozes as they also routinely refuse building permits for Arab Israeli. And of course the displaced Arabs who were not “lucky” enough to obtain citizenship have no right to return and have been living in refugee camps for generations now Well those Israeli Arabs are grandfathered and segregated , no Arabs can immigrate to Israel and none of Palestinians who were run off their land during the various conflicts are allowed to return. Hebron is surrounded by illegal Jewish settlements whose armed militias attack and harass Palestinians daily with the overwatch of the IDF. Also Hebron appears to have a Jewish community of 1100 people and an ISF garrison, as established under the 1997 Hebron Accords They have their own “river to the sea” agenda, and many on the for right who have ruled Israel for the past 20 years or so always have. The Palestinians don’t want to “come into” Israel. In fact it was Israel that came into them. Israel has no legal claim to the Occupied Territories. Those Occupied territories are the Arab world so a 2-state solution is “letting the Arab world desl eith them” But of course we aspire to live in a world of laws not emotions and there is no legal or moral justification for Israel to annex the Occupied Territories or impose collective punishment an entire ethnicity or nationality simply because you think the majority of them are A-holes. I submit that if you had to grow up under the conditions that they have been forced to endure, you would not be so different. The other fallacy in your argument is the general suggestion that one side’s cruelty and brutality can be justified by the other side’s cruelty brutality. Of course Hamas says the same thing as Palestinians have also suffered at the hands of Israelis for generations and so round and round it goes with cruelty and brutality perpetuated on both sides. Neither side will see peace until that mentality is firmly rejected by all.

No need to confirm your inability to provide an intelligent response and that Israel’s actions are indefensible a second time.

So you just wanted to confirm that you have nothing intelligent to say on the topic as the truth is indefensible. Gotcha.

You’re just proving ONCE AGAIN that everything I said about you is correct, a gullible , simple, hate-filled sucker easily fooled by Putin and fake news

To what end? It doesn’t sound like a worthy subject at all unless your goal is to ensure the supremacy of Christianity above all others is part of the curriculum There are far more important and relevant aspects of history to study There’s a difference between what the Christian Taliban is proposing here and teaching history that acknowledges the historical facts of the roles that different beliefs played in history, which is what factually happens in normal places not run by right wing extremists. None of that requires that there be bible in the classroom and that only one group’s religion be taught and celebrated Note These are the same people who oppose “studying” the impact of slavery on America to the same degree…..other than that Florida attempt to teach that many black people benefited from slavery

No you hire them. Only pathetic desperate johns like yourself call what you do a “date” Talks like a duck, quacks like a duck…