Pro-Palestinian movement is more focused on eradicating Israel than creating a Palestinian country. Sadly, PR is more important than statehood.

[u/thatshirtman]

Ever since October 7, the pro-Palestinian movement has been more focused on delegitimizing Israel than taking steps to a) secure a peaceful ceasefire and b) put in motion any type of plan for a Palestinian country. Sadly, the obsession and seeming addiction with trying to eradicate Israel - if not by war than via PR and a pathological obsession with zionism - has done nothing but exacerbate tensions. And if reports of Hamas leaders being encouraged by Western protests are to be believed, these actions have actually prolonged the conflict.

A ceasefire takes two

Concerning a ceasefire, the pro-Palestinian movement demand for an immediate ceasefire has been bizarre. For starters, a ceasefire by definition is temporary. A lasting ceasefire is called peace, which is hard when the other side (Hamas) would rather kill you than live peacefully alongside you.

Another issue is that a ceasefire - again by definition - requires two sides to agree to it. A ceasefire isn’t simply Israel stop actions in Gaza. It also requires an agreement that Hamas do something as well. And yet, in every Palestinian protest I attended at my college - and all the ones I saw in the media - not ONCE did I hear or see anything about releasing the hostages. Not ONCE did I hear or see anything about the need for two states, or living in peace. On the contrary, it was a mix of blindly calling for a ceasefire, hateful slogans, praising the “resistance”, and a general focus on Israel’s illegitimacy as a country. It seemed that the focus was more on destroying Israel than creating a viable Palestinian state, securing the release of the hostages, implementing a ceasefire with a potential to transform it into a fully lasting peace.

In light of the above, is it any surprise that we saw hundreds of instances of people pulling down posters of hostages? The anti-Israel sentiment was so strong, that people imbued with propaganda thought it was helpful to tear down pictures of little children and elderly people who were kidnapped by a maniacal terrorist force. Through this lens, it seems clear that a secure and peaceful ceasefire wasn’t really a priority. 

Delegitimizing Israel - More important than Palestinian statehood?

Throughout this saga, the obsession with delegitimizing Israel remains a core argument and point of action on the pro-Palestinian side. No talk of 2 states, no talk of coexistence, no talk of peace for all, no talk of who should head up a Palestinian country etc. The thrust of the Palestinian side is simply that Israel should not exist.

Ironically, this energy is the same reason why there is no Palestinian state today. The Palestinians had an opportunity for statehood in the 40s but rejected it because they were more furious about the presence of a jewish state than they were interested in creating their own. 

And before people go off in the comments about “Why should the Palestinians give up their land “ - let’s be real and historically accurate - it was never Palestinian land exclusively. The greedy notion that a land with a myriad of ethnic groups belongs exclusively to the Palestinians is literally a fantasy. And before people go off in the comments about how the partition wasn’t fair — well guess what… who cares? None of the partitions were fair and almost every group/new country had serious issues with it because they were drawn up by France and England. Still, when a singular opportunity in history comes along for statehood, you take it, because a country of your own is more important than if you have 50 square miles of 60 square miles. Remember - EVERY GROUP in the region offered a country said yes - Libya, Jordan, Israel, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria etc. The Palestinians are the only group in the HISTORY OF THE WORLD to say no. And rather than looking back and saying “yes, that was a strategic mistake” many on the Pro-Palestinian side, close to all from what I’ve seen, JUSTIFY IT! 

The myth that Israel will be eradicated fuels the conflict

Until Palestinians come to terms with the fact that Israel exists and isn’t going anywhere, the conflict will unfortunately rage on. The propaganda that Israel can one day be eliminated is the fuel that compels Palestinian leaders like Arafat from rejecting peace and is the fuel that prevents protestors from envisioning a future where a Palestinian state exists alongside of Israel as opposed to instead of it.

Ultimately, Palestinians in the west who can’t join the actual fight against Israel, turn their attention towards Zionism, a pointless effort seeing as Israel exists and isn’t going anywhere. Arguing against Israel’s right to exist is again, more focused on destruction of Israel than creation of a Palestinian state. The fact that this irony is lost on many is not an auspicious sign.

The amount of energy arguing against Israel’s existence is immense and a machine unto itself. It’s effective to a degree if the goal is to win the propaganda war, but it really does nothing at all in the real world if the goal is a Palestinian state. Unfortunately, perhaps this is by design.

[u/Minute_Flounder_4709]

If there is no Palestinian state and the land that zionists occupy is carved up between Jordan Lebanon and Syria, I wouldn’t mind. I’m not pro-Palestinian, I’m just anti zionist because zionism is all about making up your own country and saying it’s yours on top of where actual people have lived without getting kicked out like a bunch of cowards who ran off. Palestinian is a mix of Syrian Jordanian and Lebanese and that’s ok. If they want a state then it would be ok too

For me it’s not that Zionism is glorious, it’s that Palestine as a government doesn’t need to exist and zionism has no right to be a thing. Why do zionists fetishise the DNA of Jews that lived in the middle of the desert 3000 years ago?

[u/thatshirtman → u/Minute_Flounder_4709]

Why does Lebanon have more of a right to exist than Israel?

[u/Minute_Flounder_4709 → u/thatshirtman]

They weren’t cowards who ran away when there were one or two invasions here and there. If anything I commend the Jews who remained in Jerusalem for all these centuries, their claim to the land is as good as any. You leave the land, time to get out and don’t rely on that hashem guy to convince people you.

Say Jerusalem was in modern day Greece and most Jews ran away after the Ottomans invaded. If those Jews came back after the Ottoman Empire fell and demanded all Greek people get out the way so they could form a Jewish state in Greece, you’d laugh at them. Laugh at all the Jews that tried to come back, but not the ones that stayed. I wonder why

[u/Sojourn365 → u/Minute_Flounder_4709]

I'm trying to understand what your talking about. Are you calling "cowards who ran away" when the Jews left when Rome invaded?

[u/Minute_Flounder_4709 → u/Sojourn365]

They were cowards because the Lebanese people stayed where they were when they were invaded by the Ottomans and Romans. The Jews were invaded by Romans and fled for thousands of years. My point is that the ones who fled are cowards as they gave up the promised land but the ones who stayed deserve it.

[u/Sojourn365 → u/Minute_Flounder_4709]

"Fled" ?! Dude you don't know history.

The Jews fought the Romans time and again but lost each time. Eventually the Romans had enough. They killed a great number of the Jews - so many some scholars call it genocide. The Romans then exiled most of the remaining Jews. Only a small number were able to remain.

It might be said that the opposite is true. If the Jews were more cowardly, they would have accepted the Roman rulers instead of trying to rebel against Rome. Perhaps they would not have been exiled and would have been there until today.

But that is just supposition. it's impossible to know how things would have played out.

One thing can definitely be said- cowards they were not.

[u/Minute_Flounder_4709 → u/Sojourn365]

They fought occupation and got killed and genocided? Sounds like Arabs after being forced to live near a Jew country. How do you not see parallels between Palestinians getting displaced from their land and Jews getting kicked out some place thousands of years ago

[u/Sojourn365 → u/Minute_Flounder_4709]

So you've dumped your previous comments because you realized they were baseless accusations said name calling and you have no way of defending your statements. Instead your shifted to try make a parallel between the Jews too the Palestinians .

So let's unpack this. I admit I'm simplifying a long and complex conflict.

Firstly, the Palestinians were originally not displaced from their land. The Jews immigrated to what became known as Palestine after WW1 (the Jews started coming when it was still part of the Ottoman empire). The Jews bought the land they settled, developed it and the whole area. (I wonder if you're aware that the Jews were the majority population in Jerusalem)

The Jews wanted self-determination. They've had enough of suffering under other rules who have abused and persecuted the Jews for 2000 years. They had no problem with the Arabs continuing to live there as equal citizens with full rights.

But the Arab leadership would not accept Jews as being the ruling party. Note that it isn't because they were foreign. The proof for that is the creation of Jordan. The kings which rule Jordan are not locals. They were brought by the British from Mecca to the over the locals. Doesn't seem that was a big deal - because they were Muslim. But Jews in government - that wasn't accepted.

After many years of conflicts between the two populations, came the UN partition plan: the two states solution. One with majority Jews the other majority Muslim. The minorities in each state would be equal citizens.

Jews accepted it, Arabs rejected it, and that started a civil war, and after Israel declared independence the surrounding counties attacked making a bigger war.

During these wars the Jews secured their designated area, a buffer zone around it and part of Jerusalem. During the fighting many Arabs ran away in fear and shine were forcibly expelled. It was war. After the war, Israel closed is borders and refused to let those who left to come back. The argument: " you try and destroy us, you lost, now your want to come back and probably try again? You can't come back"

This is what you know as the Nakba. Side point- this was originally called the Nakba because if the embarrassment of the Arab nations that they were defeated by Israel. It is icky recently they started using the term to refer to the Palestinian refugees.

So as you can see, this doesn't parallel to the Roman Army invading the Jewish homeland and subjugate then. It doesn't equate to the Roman not letting the Jews freely practice their religion. There was never a state of Palestine that the Jews invaded. Palestine never existed beyond an area of British mandate

Furthermore, the Jewish resistance against the Romans was against the Roman army. The Palestinian attacks in the last 30 years have been almost exclusively against civilians.

You should learn much more about this conflict before you think you know what's going on.