While I actually have sympathy for people on both sides of the struggle, I also find it hard to answer "yes" to both questions, mostly because of how muddied the definitions of everything are. It's obvious to me, that both the Israeli government and Hamas are both committing serious warcrimes, and that there no good actors here, here are some questions I don't have an answer to.
For example, is Palestine its own country? Is Hamas is its rightful government? Does that extend to the West Bank or only in Gaza? Palestinians seem to say that Palestine is its own country, Israelis say that Palestinians are not a part of Israel - so how can it be an apartheid state if BOTH sides say they aren't part of the same country at all?
Is Israel committing a genocide? Well, what does a genocide look like? Israel is still distributing food in Gaza, to this day. I don't think it would look like this, but at the same time, there are terrorists on both sides (Itamar ben-Gvir being the most prominent on the Israeli side, in my opinion).
There are more issues and questions and uncertainty around the problems in Israel, Palestine, the Levant as a whole, Iran's involvement and so on.
Even worse, for most Israelis (who are 70% of Arab descent), the country of Israel no longer existing could mean a real genocide for the Israel side! (A counter-genocide?) Regardless, if this issue were easy to solve, it would have been solved already.
Honestly, the situation seems to complicated to boil down to two "simple" questions and I admire that you can have such an "obvious" outlook, but the more I look at Israel and the Middle East (and read, and research), the more questions I have.
The definitions aren't muddled. Apartheid [1] and genocide [2] are both defined by the UN. Apartheid in particular is also objectively true. Do Israeli Arabs have the same rights as Jewish Israelis? No, objectively [3][4].
As for Palestine being its own country, it clearly isn't. Palestinians live on land claimed by Israel and recognized by pretty much every country in the world. But what if it was? Then Israel is illegally occupying it. Is that better? Why does this matter? Does one make the treatment of Gazans (in particular) more acceptable?
> Even worse, for most Israelis (who are 70% of Arab descent), the country of Israel no longer existing could mean a real genocide for the Israel side!
You can't use a theoretical future genocide to justify a current actual genocide. Also, it's ahistorical. Did this happen when apartheid South Africa ended? What about slavery? No, what actually happened was the former oppressors continued to commit violence against the previously oppressed.
While I appreciate your candor, words matter. I wouldn't call Israel an apartheid state if, in fact, it was two different countries warring to the death over not enough land. I think that situation is closer to reality, with the "victorious" side refusing to completely destroy the loser and the loser refusing to surrender to the "victor".
That situation has changed for the worse in recent years, and the world should step in, if it can. How the world should step in is not obvious - especially if the thorny history of the region is considered.
Finally, on the "current vs future 'genocides'" - dismissing Israel's legitimate security concerns would be as wrong as dismissing Israel's obvious warcrimes, in my opinion. I can't, in good conscience, advocate for action that would replace one genocide with another and it's important to me to consider my actions and words in that light. You may think differently, but maybe you value human life and morality differently than I do.
It's obvious you've made up your mind, but I don't think you've convinced anyone who hasn't already made up their mind, nor have you addressed, what I believe, are very valid questions about the conflict.
Yes, Israel is unequivocally committing genocide in Gaza. Genocide is not just "are they killing everybody", but also "are they driving people from their ancestral homelands"?
Israel is constitutionally an ethnostate. If there is an existing population, there is literally no way to establish an ethnostate without genocide - either through killing or displacement.
Muslims do not have full rights, especially those who were murdered and had their land stolen. Do Muslims have the right of return? No. Can any Jew become an Israeli citizen? Yes. There are many other discrepancies.
Again, being Jewish does not give someone special immigration status. It’s completely orthogonal to citizenship. That Israel goes against this principle is what makes it an apartheid colony.
So by this argument, we should just go defeat Israel and give the land back to the Palestinians and no one should have anything negative to say about it right?
Land ownership is determined by your ability to defend it. If you can get a coalition to take down Israel, the land is yours to do whatever you want with it. That is how it works, if you want land, have big guns or big friends.
Nothing I said has any bearing on morality or correctness.
It's also not my logic anymore than the wind stoking a forest fire is my logic. It's just shitty thing that is true. On the global stage, where there is no higher power to appeal to (none of these fools god's exists), your land is only what you can defend with either might or diplomacy. This is a (very shitty, but very real) natural law that exists in the universe we were born into (aliens might decide they want Earth one day). If you run a country, and fail at both of those things, you likely will not being running a country for long.
I mean, here you are agreeing that Israel needs to be stopped by force. An army assembled to go in and kill Israeli soldiers until Palestine is free. See how quick that "morality" flies out the window?
Diplomacy and guns, that's all there is. Morality comes later, if ever at all.
It’s absolutely the moral choice to end Israel. Just like apartheid South Africa. Israel just happens to be much worse and much more belligerent with much more control over the rest of the world. They created a situation where the moral option is their complete destruction.
I'm replying to a comment that says Muslims have equal rights to Jews in Israel and pointing out that is 100% incorrect. That is the world that we live in, the world where Israel is an apartheid state.
Again, "positively discriminates for Jews" is the definition of apartheid. I posted a link with many other apartheid laws. You're not arguing in good faith, so this will be the end of our conversation.
Judaism isn't just a religion; Israel happily accepts non-religious Jews. The goal was to solve a massive refugee problem for a persecuted group with nowhere else to go.
In any case, as a sovereign state, Israel gets to decide on its own immigration policy, regardless of how foreigners feel about it.
Judaism is in fact, just a religion. Zionists are not refugees, they are colonists. They didn’t need to “go” anywhere and regardless of need, never had the right to set foot in Palestine.
> regardless of how foreigners feel about it.
Without the US, Israel will cease to exist. It’s my problem to deal with as a US citizen.
We've banned this account for using HN primarily for ideological/political/religious battle. That's not allowed here, regardless of what you're battling for or against.
Edit: Since your account has been on HN a long time and obviously wasn't created for this purpose, I'll add this bit: If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email [email protected] and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
We've banned this account for using HN primarily for ideological/political/religious battle. That's not allowed here, regardless of what you're battling for or against.
Oh please! You ban me but not these accounts? Zionists get free reign to spread their propaganda but if anyone dares speak against it, instant ban. Very easy to see who runs this site.
I know that looks like sinister bias when your passions on a topic are intense enough, but this is very much a construct of the beholder, as anyone who takes the time to look at our actual track record would see.
For example, is Palestine its own country? Is Hamas is its rightful government? Does that extend to the West Bank or only in Gaza? Palestinians seem to say that Palestine is its own country, Israelis say that Palestinians are not a part of Israel - so how can it be an apartheid state if BOTH sides say they aren't part of the same country at all?
Is Israel committing a genocide? Well, what does a genocide look like? Israel is still distributing food in Gaza, to this day. I don't think it would look like this, but at the same time, there are terrorists on both sides (Itamar ben-Gvir being the most prominent on the Israeli side, in my opinion).
There are more issues and questions and uncertainty around the problems in Israel, Palestine, the Levant as a whole, Iran's involvement and so on.
Even worse, for most Israelis (who are 70% of Arab descent), the country of Israel no longer existing could mean a real genocide for the Israel side! (A counter-genocide?) Regardless, if this issue were easy to solve, it would have been solved already.
Honestly, the situation seems to complicated to boil down to two "simple" questions and I admire that you can have such an "obvious" outlook, but the more I look at Israel and the Middle East (and read, and research), the more questions I have.