undefined | Better HN

0 pointsthrow3108228mo ago0 comments

"That one side of the story" are the facts on the ground.

- One side is occupying the other's lands, not the other way around.

- One side has killed most people, not the other way around.

- One side has illegally annexed the other's territory, not the other way around.

- One side enforces apartheid, not the other way around.

- One side regularly destroys the other's villages, not the other way around.

- One side steals water, destroys greenhouses and olive groves, imposes blockades- not the other way around.

- One side is rich, organised, well armed, and has the full support of the West, not the other way around.

0 comments

pegasus8mo ago

There are other facts on the ground which go the other way, you just choose to ignore them. Like the fact that one side has offered a two-state solution, the other has refused it. Or that one side is much more democratic than the other. That one side has been openly and proudly promoting exterminating the other side wholesale for much longer, and much more vocally than the other side. You could use an LLM to come up with more examples, then verify accuracy yourself. But then what would be left of your comfortable illusions of clarity?

tdeck8mo ago

> Like the fact that one side has offered a two-state solution,

True. Hamas has offered this since 2017 [1] but Israel has never honestly offered it. And it's practically impossible anyway at this point with all the illegal (under international law) settlements in the west bank, supported by the IDF. Something you wouldn't do if you were trying to move toward a "two state solution", but something you would do if that was just talk intended to delay any implementation of Palestinian human rights in Israeli occupied territory while finalizing a drawn out campaign of ethnic cleansing as fast as you think the US will allow.

[1]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/01/hamas-new-char...

pegasus8mo ago

Yeah, it's Israel which "never honestly offered it", while Hamas, who always maintained that Israel has no place in the middle east, does offer such a solution in this proposal, while curiously not mentioning Israel at all, only that they shall take the whole of Jerusalem. But the article helpfully infers that this elision means Hamas would clarly accept Israel's right to exist. It just reeks of honesty...

1 more reply

F3nd08mo ago

> Hamas advocates the liberation of all of Palestine but is ready to support the state on 1967 borders without recognising Israel or ceding any rights

In what way can this be read as 'honestly offering a two-state solution'? If one is not willing to recognise that there would be two (sovereign) states, it's not much of a two-state solution, is it?

1 more reply

ImPostingOnHN8mo ago

> one side has offered a two-state solution

Yes, Palestine. A 2-state solution means 2 equal states, without 1 bossing the other around, and with each being equally protected against the other.

> the other has refused it.

Yes, israel: not only do they refuse proposed 2-state solutions, they even refuse proposed ceasefires that could lead to peace.

> That one side has been openly and proudly exterminating the other side wholesale

Yes, israel is actually doing this.

> one side is much more democratic than the other

How does israel feel about the democratic votes held in the UN regarding their behavior? Does israel respect that democracy?

zoratu7mo ago

There have been MANY proposals for two state solutions, from Israel and from the UN and from other third parties that both sides were willing to listen to, going back to 1937. In each case, they've been rejected by Palestinian leaders. After 88 years of rejected proposals, relentless violence from the Palestinians with no sign of stopping, and generations of young people indoctrinated with hatred, it's no wonder the current government has no interest in concessions.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsthrow3108228mo ago0 comments

"That one side of the story" are the facts on the ground.

- One side is occupying the other's lands, not the other way around.

- One side has killed most people, not the other way around.

- One side has illegally annexed the other's territory, not the other way around.

- One side enforces apartheid, not the other way around.

- One side regularly destroys the other's villages, not the other way around.

- One side steals water, destroys greenhouses and olive groves, imposes blockades- not the other way around.

- One side is rich, organised, well armed, and has the full support of the West, not the other way around.

0 comments

pegasus8mo ago

tdeck8mo ago

> Like the fact that one side has offered a two-state solution,

[1]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/01/hamas-new-char...

pegasus8mo ago

1 more reply

F3nd08mo ago

> Hamas advocates the liberation of all of Palestine but is ready to support the state on 1967 borders without recognising Israel or ceding any rights

In what way can this be read as 'honestly offering a two-state solution'? If one is not willing to recognise that there would be two (sovereign) states, it's not much of a two-state solution, is it?

1 more reply

ImPostingOnHN8mo ago

> one side has offered a two-state solution

Yes, Palestine. A 2-state solution means 2 equal states, without 1 bossing the other around, and with each being equally protected against the other.

> the other has refused it.

Yes, israel: not only do they refuse proposed 2-state solutions, they even refuse proposed ceasefires that could lead to peace.

> That one side has been openly and proudly exterminating the other side wholesale

Yes, israel is actually doing this.

> one side is much more democratic than the other

How does israel feel about the democratic votes held in the UN regarding their behavior? Does israel respect that democracy?

zoratu7mo ago

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse