So is Israel just going to completely overtake Palestine?
SleezyDizasta @ SleezyDizasta @lemmy.world Posts 0Comments 195Joined 1 yr. ago
SleezyDizasta @ SleezyDizasta @lemmy.world
Posts
0
Comments
195
Joined
1 yr. ago
I'm literally Arab (Iraqi), but okay
A lot of unnecessary fluff, but you do have a question hidden down there.
What fluff? I wrote 5 sentences lmao
Paraphrased: “After decades of colonization, why would Israel publicly state that they were ending all illegal ongoing colonization?”
Yeah, this isn't going to fly by me. This is just the strawman fallacy. That is NOT what I asked. I asked a very simple and straight forward question:
If their ultimate goal is complete conquest, why would they have done such a move?
This is clearly in reference to their unilateral exit in 2005 from Gaza. If you want to have a discussion with me then at least have the decency to be honest. I won't respond to an answer about a question I didn't ask, but I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt to answer the actual question I asked. If you can't help but be disingenuous then I'm afraid this discussion will end with my comment here.
https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2024/3/8/israeli-settlement-expansion-in-palestinian-areas-amounts-to-war-crime-un https://www.aljazeera.com/features/longform/2024/3/19/how-israeli-settlers-are-expanding-illegal-outposts-amid-gaza-war
Al Jazeera is literally a state sponsored propaganda outlet that is owned by the authoritarian theocracy of Qatar. This outlet is a bad source in general, but it's notorious for it's misinformation and outright when it comes to this specific conflict. If this is where you get your information then I'm not surprised why your talking points are nothing than inaccurate propaganda.
This image is a prime example of what propaganda looks like. I know you don't have any, but let's use our critical thinking skills for a bit and analyze why this picture is complete trash:
- The key insinuates that Jews are foreign to the area. This is also entirely false. Jews have always had very sizable presence in this region dating back thousands of years. They were there long before islam, long before Arab colonization, long before the Roman even came up with the term Palestine. This is because Jews are indigenous to the area, but the word choices for the key is trying to erase that.
- The colors chosen are also propaganda. They chose green for Palestine, which is the national color, but instead of using blue for Israel, they chose white. Why is that? Well that's easy, because this color scheme gives the impression that Palestine is "real" entity and it is being "erased", when that's not the case.
- The first map is intentionally there to insinuate that Palestine existed prior to 1947. This is entirely false. Before the creation of the modern states, before that there was the British mandate, and before that it was the Ottoman Empire which had completely different division for this region. Palestine as sovereign entity has quite literally never existed at any point in history. The concept of a Palestinian nation is as artificial and new as the modern state of Israel.
- Also the the first map is also dishonest in another way because it colors inhabited areas as green. The Negev desert for example is largely uninhabited but it is colored green to give the impression that Palestine is more than what it actually is. Most muslim Arabs back then lived in the same sliver of land as what it showed for the Jews, but if they just showed an honest map of the Arab and Jewish settlements then it would give a different story and this wouldn't be such a good propaganda map, now would it?
- The second map tries insinuate that the UN took away from Palestine in 1947, but that's false because that was the very first time Palestine was even acknowledged as a sovereign entity.
- The third map exists to try and give a sense of progression while also masking away massive amounts of context... like the wars of 1948 and 1967 when Palestine rejected any plans for peace and coexistence, and they along with their Arab allies formed coalition armies and invaded Israel from every angle with the explicit intention of destroying... but they ended up losing both wars in a pretty convincing fashion against Israel by itself. As a part of the peace agreements the Arabs agreed to cede land to Israel.
- The first 3 maps go from 1947 to 1967, but then on the fourth map, it skips 38 years and stops at 2005... 19 years ago. Why would it skip all of this time? And why stop at this point in 2005? Well it's simple, if they stopped any earlier then their propaganda map would be called out for not recognizing that Israel left Gaza as that's a the biggest sign that Israel is trying to cooperate to find peace, but if they stopped the map more recently then their propaganda map would've been called out for not pointing out any of the atrocities that the Palestinians instigated and committed. This point in 2005 is just perfect for propaganda, it's far back enough in time to feel disconnected from the modern Palestinian terrorist attacks and wars, but recent enough where it could be argued into the present.
- Finally, the map has no source. It's a perfect propaganda piece because it can't be traced back to where it originated and therefore isn't a source to verify the accuracy of the information.
Now what did we learn from all of this little exercise? A little of critical thinking can go a long way in recognizing and dispelling propaganda. Try it some time!
Maybe I'm an optimist, but I genuinely believe that big change isn't that far into the future. Completely revamping the country to go back to dense cities and towns that aren't dependent on cars is a long term thing, but seeing a housing boom is something that can happen within the next few years. I mean the hard part is just getting those laws updated. Once they are and developers are incentivized to build more homes, multifamily homes, and mixed zoned buildings they would get right to it. We're getting to a point where we're starting to see real change in a lot cities and even some states:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-family_zoning#Rezoning_efforts_(2018-present)
I mean California, the biggest state in the country effectively eliminated single family zoning statewide. We're also seeing change in conservative and liberal states. I'm hoping these changes yield positive results that will lead to a wave that will eventually lead to changes at the national level. Kind of like how it happened with gay marriage recently or is happening right now with marijuana legalization and the minimum wage.
Name the claim and I'll provide you with a source.
I'm pointing that Egypt has already collapsed since Israel captured the Sinai and returned it in exchange for recognition. You claimed that when this Egyptian government collapses, or rather if it does, then Israel will seize the opportunity to do so. But they've had this opportunity presented to them already. For example, in 2011... but they didn't do anything, so why would they now?
The point is that even if they invade Lebanon again, it will be similar to the prior military operations they've had before. They're not going to capture Lebanese territories like they did with Golan Heights. Otherwise they would've done it since they've had multiple opportunities to do so.
If you actually took into account the context, it's very obvious that I said I don't care about your claim that conflict is old and goes back many years. Nobody is disputing that. My point is that you made specific claim, which is that Israel wants to annex the Palestinian territories entirely as their ultimate goal, however, that is blatantly false because Israel literally gave up their settlements in Gaza voluntarily in 2005 and unilaterally existed. If their ultimate goal is complete conquest, why would they have done such a move? This event contradicts your thesis and disproves your claim.
Nobody is disputing what the solution is… the issue that the regime will not allow any of this happen.
Change doesn't happen over night, especially in democracies. The system is supposed to be slow and steady. Our zoning laws started taking place around 100 years ago and then we spent the next century building our towns, cities, and culture around them. We can't reverse all of this overnight, this requires a long term national effort. The Suburban house became the American dream, it became an American icon, it became the standard. It was was and still is so desirable that it became the biggest asset for most families, and this led to it's own wave of restrictive and discriminatory zoning laws. It took the housing crash in 2008 for us to revisit our zoning laws and look at them critically, and after a decade of criticism and effort, we've only started seeing reforms on local and state levels in the past 5 or so years. We've still got a long way to go to meaningful national change, but we're heading in the right direction. You just have to vote for the candidates that will make the changes and tell people about the problems with out zoning laws, because most people don't even know.
I don’t see how that’s a conspiracy since it it is happening before out eyes. Give some limp services about 5 “affordable” units in 1000 unit lux condo. That’s where we are at now.
Developers keep building these ultra luxury condo towers because they're only ones our zoning laws allow to be economically viable. There's a reason why this country only has two extremes between massive skyscrapers and single family homes, while most other countries have an in between.
Fun fact: vast majority people in Romania own their property outright.
Yeah now because they've made reforms to allow for ownership back in the 90s. During the communist era, people couldn't own land.
Lol imagine feeling so attacked by someone calling out and criticizing your blatantly made up and ignorant claims that you actually resort to a toddler level insult where you call me stupid, call yourself "well informed" (lmao), and then put yourself on the back for it as if you actually did anything more than clown yourself. I was right on the money, you don't actually have any idea what you're talking about. You just regurgitate the propaganda you consume on echo chambers like Lemmy, and then make up stuff to fill the gaps. But I agree, I won't waste your time because that would mean I would be wasting my time on somebody who doesn't actually bring anything of value. Now scurry back to your echo chamber before the big scary knowledge comes and destroys your ignorant worldviews. Shoo, go on then
This is such a brainless and oversimplified ideological point of view. If you actually bothered to look into the region, you would clearly see that there's a lot more going on. For example:
- The Ottoman Empire genocided the Armenians, Greeks, Assyrians and a bunch of other minorities leaving them all to resent the Turks... especially since Turkey still officially denies that any of them even happened
- Turkey actively oppresses and squashes any attempt for Kurds to maintain their identity, let alone gain independence which leads them to hate the Turks. Just FYI, the Kurdish language, clothing, and culture was banned in Turkey until the 1980s.
- Turkey illegally occupies half of Cyprus under the pretext of "protecting the Turkish minorities", and both Greece and Cyprus hate them for it because they've broken their treaties and are illegally occupying half of the country
- Syrians hate Turkey too because it invaded the north and still occupies parts of it
- The Turks hate Arabs and vice versa because Arabs view the Turks as colonizers turned heathens since they're now secular and allow a bunch of things not allowed in islam, and the Turks view the Arabs as backwards religious fundamentalists who leech of them since there are millions Arab of refugees in Turkey
- Kuwait hates Iraq because it invaded in the 90s
- Iran and Iraq don't like each other because of the Iran-Iraq war in the 80s
- The Iraqi Kurds hate the Arabs because Saddam Hussein genocided them
- The Sunni and Shia in Iraq hate each other because they're different sects of the same religion, and oh they fought wars over it too
- Yemen, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon DESPISE Iran because it actively funds and arms terrorist militias that constantly terrorize them, steal their wealth, and keep their countries into unstable failed states
- Saudi Arabia and the Gulf countries hate Iran because they're Shia and because they keep threatening their oil exports in the
- Saudi Arabia hates the Shia in Yemen (the Houthis)
- The Yemeni people hate Saudi Arabia because of the war they led against them
- Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the UAE, and Bahrain all severed ties with Qatar in 2017 because it funds terrorist groups inside their borders and because it uses Al Jazeera to pump out propaganda against them. In the case of Saudi Arabia, the mutual hatred got so bad that the royal family actually proposed digging a moat around Qatar to turn it into an island
- All of the islamic countries in the Middle East hate Israel because it's Jewish
- Egypt and Turkey don't like each other because Turkey is trying to claim the EEZ of the eastern Mediterranean, some of which is Egypt's
- Armenia and Azerbaijan hate each other because Azerbaijan denies the Armenian genocide, because on is Christian and the other is muslim, and because of a territorial dispute created by Stalin that they've been fighting over for the past 30 years.
- Georgia hates Armenia, despite both of them being Christian nations, because they supported Russia's invasion of Georgia in 2008
- Kuwait hates Palestine because they supported Saddam Hussein's invasion in the 90s, which led Kuwait to expel all 350,000 Palestinians from its territory
- Jordan hates Palestine because they tried to overthrow the government when they took them in as refugees. This series of events was so bad it became known as black September
- Syria doesn't like Palestine because they tried to overthrow the government during the Syrian civil war
- Egypt doesn't like Palestine because they used the Sinai to commit terrorist attacks and they tried to overthrow the government. It got so bad that they joined Israel in their blockade against Gaza
- Saudi Arabia and the UAE also don't like Palestine because despite all the numerous military, economic, and political aid... their efforts blew up in their faces. The UAE ended up recognizing Israel and Saudi Arabia released a 3 part documentary featuring one of their top diplomats that went through the history of Saudi Arabia's support for Palestine and how the Palestinian leaders were liers, cheaters, and backstabbers
- Georgia doesn't like Turkey because of its Ottoman past
- All the caucuses countries hate Russia because of their genocides and imperialism
- Syria hates Israel because they occupy Golan Heights
- Lebanon hates Israel because they invaded to stomp out Hezbollah
- Israel doesn't like any of it's neighbors because they're Arabs and they all supported Palestine
- Israel also doesn't like Lebanon specifically because of Hezbollah
- Iran and Israel hate each other because of religious fundamentalism
- Iranian people, especially the minorities, HATE their government because it's theocratic and their government hates them back because the people are secular
- Israel doesn't like Jordan, Syria, Egypt, or Lebanon because they invaded it before
- Christians hate muslims because they've been persecuting them
- Kurds in Syria don't like the Arabs because they also tried to suppress them
- Turkey and Israel have a love hate relationship based on Netanyahu's and Erdogan's mood swings.
The list goes on and on. No matter how recent or how far back you go, this region has ALWAYS been unstable, violent, and tyrannical. This because it's in the crossroads of 3 continents like you said, but also because of geography and culture that reinforces the same cycles. Western powers did play a role, but trying to blame all the division, violence, and hatred in that region on the West is just ignorant.
This is such juvenile take. We're not going to turn our country into an authoritarian technocracy to implement a solution that is almost guaranteed to fail anywhere outside of an authoritarian city state. Singapore is not a model for any country, they are the anomaly in the world. We can't copy and paste. Other countries have tried the same idea and they all have failed. Romania, the Soviet Union, Poland, East Germany, China, etc. Our housing solution can't be built on childish ideals, they have to be pragamtic and they have to take into account our political system, our culture, our strengths, and our problems. When we look into our own history, we can see that we already solved our housing crises multiple times before. When there's a housing shortage, we have incentivize the market to flood the market with new units. This will drive down prices and increase inventory, which is exactly what we need. It's a tried and true method. The adjustments we need to make are basic too, we just have update our zoning laws remove outdated restrictions that outlaw mixed zoning and multifamily housing, as well as give local and regional municipalities more power and flexibility to design towns and cities around more than just cars.
Vienna is an interesting case because it's one of the few democratic countries where the majority of the country isn't too opposed to subsidizing the housing of a single city without enjoying any of the benefits. I guess when the model can work when there's more people putting money into it than people who can actually enjoy it. Speaking of which, this system still has it's issues though. Everybody wants to live in these units, but not everybody can get one. In order to get one you have to apply and most likely be put on a waitlist. Some of these wait lists are brutal because there's only 5000-7000 units available. It's gotten bad to the point where people are turning more and more towards private housing. Even with the limited number of units, the city is actually struggling to maintain the system because of inflation and other factors.
What are you on? There is no grand conspiracy. A city is much easier to manage than a big ass country and an authoritarian government has the power to carry out it's plans while giving zero fucks about the people. People don't realize that Singapore is one of the most authoritarian developed countries out there. In Singapore, all land is held by the state, people cannot own any property, they can only lease it from the government kind of like China. Neighborhoods have very strict ethnic quotas. For example, if you're ethnically Chinese and want to live in a neighborhood that is already 85% Chinese? Well tough luck because you're legally not allowed to buy there until that percentage comes down. Because everything is publicly owned, the government is in charge of maintenance, and a good chunk of the buildings aren't well maintained. You can't complain about it because Singapore is authoritarian. You also can't complain about the location or the design of the buildings because the governments gets decide all of that. What's more is that a lot of these projects are built on top Singaporean cultural and historical sites, which a lot of Singaporeans argue is an erasure of their culture. Despite all of these problems, their system works because their government is authoritarian, the city is small enough to be effectively managed, they've lucked out with a series of competent leaders. If any of three things isn't present, you'll have a recipe for disaster. Want an example? Just take a look at the Soviet Union.
They're both. You can't detach them from the market because they are products of the market. In order for a house to be built you need landscapers to clear out the plot, a construction crew to build up the house and foundation, electricians to wire up the house, plumbers to hookup the pipes, roofers to put on the shingles, architects to design the whole thing, and you need to buy the material... which require loggers, welders, miners, factory workers, glaziers, and the list goes on and on. Even then, you still need appliances like stoves, refrigerators, microwaves, etc and each of those has it's own supply chain and ecosystem. All of these people are trading their labor for money, they're not going to work for free. Therefore, in order to have a house, you have to pay all these people in the chain to actually get the final product which you can either sell or enjoy. A house is commodity made of commodities. I'm not exactly sure what you're expecting here, do you think the government is going to build houses with slave labor? Do you think we're going to water the ground and get houses to grow? Do you expect us to follow in steps of a failed ideology like Marxism and have the government try to control the entire economy? No, these are all dumb. We can acknowledge that these are necessities and should be made accessible, safe, and affordable but also acknowledge that they're products of the market and therefore we have to work with it, not against it.
Singapore is an authoritarian city state. Their model can't be replicated in any country that's not an authoritarian city.
The issue with this figure is that it comes from the Census Bureau, and their definition is broad and simple that it doesn't into account for example. Here's the definition they use:
Vacant Housing Units. A housing unit is vacant if no one is living in it at the time of the interview, unless its occupants are only temporarily absent. In addition, a vacant unit may be one which is entirely occupied by persons who have a usual residence elsewhere. New units not yet occupied are classified as vacant housing units if construction has reached a point where all exterior windows and doors are installed and final usable floors are in place. Vacant units are excluded if they are exposed to the elements, that is, if the roof, walls, windows, or doors no longer protect the interior from the elements, or if there is positive evidence (such as a sign on the house or block) that the unit is to be demolished or is condemned. Also excluded are quarters being used entirely for nonresidential purposes, such as a store or an office, or quarters used for the storage of business supplies or inventory, machinery, or agricultural products. Vacant sleeping rooms in lodging houses, transient accommodations, barracks, and other quarters not defined as housing units are not included in the statistics in this report. (See section on "Housing Unit.")
https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/definitions.pdf
As you can see this definition doesn't really take into account a lot of genuine factors. For example, a lot of units are in really poor condition and require renovations in order to be livable again, but they're counted as vacant because they still have their exteriors in place. Same goes units. They're also counting units that are not entirely completed, units that are occupied but just temporarily like vacation homes, and mobile homes. We do have a lot of vacant units in this country, but it's not as much as this figure would lead you to believe. In reality, we need new units, we need a lot of them, and we need them ASAP.
Which countries? Unaffordable housing is a problem worldwide
It already has, numerous times. Nothing happened.
This is blatantly false. France and Greece, for example, explicitly supported Armenia and the rest of the EU and NATO was largely neutral except for Turkey because they were dealing with Covid lockdowns.
This is true but the squashing of the Kurds didn't start with the West nor did end there, they merely continued something that already existed. The Ottoman Empire and the Arab empires before it were all explicitly suppressed the Kurds.
Such embarrassing ignorance. This is from the very wiki article that you linked:
The international community condemns Turkey's illegal occupation of Cyprus. There is a reason why no country on earth except for the occupier, Turkey, recognizes this fake puppet state as a country. Even Turkey's other puppet, Azerbaijan, which is the most loyal of Turkey's allies doesn't recognize it.
Not only is the international community unanimously against Turkey, but they also violated the Treaty of Guaranteed of 1960. This was a joint agreement between Turkey, Cyprus, Greece, and the UK regarding the protection and territorial integrity of Cyprus. Turkey was one four principal signatories and one of the three supposed protectorates of Cyprus, and they only signed the treaty a few years before their occupation.
This is taken directly from the Treaty of Guarantee of 1960:
You can read the full treaty right here: https://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/CY%20GR%20TR_600816_Treaty%20of%20Guarantee.pdf
As you can see Turkey is in clear violation of this treaty. It is refusing to cooperate with the other protectorates of this treaty and it is directly violating Cyprus' sovereignty and territorial integrity.
But actually gets even worse because the Turkish speaking Cypriots want to reunite with their Greek neighbors and unify the island, and there are have been ongoing demonstrations by the native people there for DECADES against Turkish occupation:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Turkish_Cypriot_protests (50,000 to 80,000 people turned out, that's about 1/3 of the 170,000 native Turkish speaking Cypriots) https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jan/09/rising-anger-with-turkey-drives-calls-for-reunification-in-crisis-hit-northern-cyprus https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/nov/15/erdogan-met-by-protests-from-turkish-cypriots-during-visit-northern-cyprus https://cyprus-mail.com/2024/04/26/hundreds-of-turkish-cypriots-protest-against-govt/ https://apnews.com/article/europe-middle-east-government-and-politics-united-nations-suburbs-235658ac64b564902747dc2225933899 https://apnews.com/ea58f13ac33a49479048df04357d78c7/Turkish-Cypriots-protest-Turkey's-'unwanted'-meddling
What does Turkey do in response to this very clear opposition from the native Turkish speaking Cypriots who want them to leave, respect the treaties they've signed, and want to unite with the rest of the island? That's right Turkey sends in over 100,000 non native Turkish residents to occupy the island: https://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/X2H-Xref-ViewHTML.asp?FileID=10153&lang=EN#:~:text=According%20to%20reliable%20estimates%2C%20their,way%20from%20those%20in%20Cyprus. http://www.mfa.gov.cy/mfa/Embassies/Embassy_Vienna/vienna.nsf/page74_en/page74_en?OpenDocument
Which by the way is a clear violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention's Article 49 which includes:
https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/atrocity-crimes/Doc.33_GC-IV-EN.pdf
Calling Turkey's illegal occupation of Northern Cyprus anything but that shows that you're either a historically ignorant, a bootlicker, or an authoritarian extremist like a Marxist or Fascist. Though in your case, it's probably all 3.
I wonder how it feels to be confidentially incorrect. I can't really tell if this a projection or just a lack of self awareness.
Actually this isn't true. Israel and Armenia are pretty neutral towards each other. Armenia was the only country in West Asia, other than Israel, to not recognize Palestine as a country. Actually they only did so yesterday, and everybody sees this as a tit for tat for Israel signing that arms contract with Azerbaijan back in 2012 where they gave them drones and other military equipment (which the Azeri dictator Aliyev used against them in 2020) over the next few years in exchange for their oil (which makes up 40-60% of their oil imports) and having Azerbaijan and Turkey remain allies against Iran... but despite this there's calls in Israel to recognize the Armenian genocide and talks in Armenia to buy Israeli weapons: https://en.globes.co.il/en/article-armenia-mulls-procuring-iai-missiles-report-1001482068 https://www.thejc.com/lets-talk/why-israel-must-now-recognise-the-armenian-genocide-jvxgn8k7
Armenia used to be a strong Russian ally in hopes of having Russia protect it from Azerbaijan, and it's big ally Turkey, a NATO member. However, when Azerbaijan attacked and Armenia invoked it's defense clause, Russia refused to help. Not only that but it's puppet Belarus, publicly came out in support Azerbaijan. Because of this Armenia has publicly announced it's intent to withdraw from the CSTO and draw closer to the West, especially after France, Greece, and even the US (remember that Nancy Pelosi trip?) all showed support to Armenia over Azerbaijan. Which leaves Armenia in a very weird and complicated geopolitical situation. Trying to oversimplify their geopolitical situation is just stupid.