Israeli officials say they were targeting a Hezbollah munitions factory but this was strenuously denied by locals in the village of Kfor near Nabatieh town.
Israeli airstrikes killed dozens of people including two families in both Gaza and Lebanon, while Hezbollah fired a volley of 55 rockets into northern Israel in response.
World leaders urged restraint and tried to frame the ceasefire negotiations as heading in a positive direction.
But in an interview with Sky News, the leader of Hamas in Lebanon told us no progress had been made so far at the talks and the two sides appear to be just as far apart as ever.
Hamas is not at the negotiations but messages and updates have been passed on to them on the sidelines.
I firmly believe that there won’t be peace as long as Israel exists on Palestinian land. And before people claim random stuff on what I say; sure Israel can exist but not on Palestinian land while genociding the native people. For example, US is their biggest enabler and supporter.. So perhaps they can allow Israel to exist within US.
And not as an ethnostate. No matter which ethnicity is favored, establishing and maintaining an ethnostate necessitates violent oppression and persecution of other ethnicities.
Baby steps though. Look how long it took humans to come up with democratic governance. It could be snuffed out in much less time, and we cannot force people to change their culture if they don't want it to change.
Yeah, most of those aren't ethnostates. Besides, it's the dismantling of the ethnostate form of governing I'm calling for, not the countries misgoverned in such a way.
The only one you mentioned that is INHERENTLY an ethnostate and always has been is Israel.
I'd say nice try, but that was really a pathetic attempt at selling your false equivalence.
It's the dismantling of the ethnostate form of governing I'm calling for, not the countries misgoverned in such a way.
This nuance always seems to get lost in the heat.
I get the anger about this war in Gaza, but way too many people are ready to feed Israel to Iran, which would kill millions of people throughout the region, as if Israel is completely irredeemable. It's a flawed democracy, and it's current leadership has a limited shelf life.
They are ethnostates. You are not the arbiter of what counts. If a nation has a diaspora, it is an ethnostate and all those listed do. Trying to conceal overt racism behind improperly applied definitions is weak tea.
While two or more of them are currently under the internal occupation of ultranationalists, none of them are INHERENTLY ethnostates. By your definition India, one of the most diverse countries in the world, would be an ethnostate as well just because the Hindu nationalist party of Modi is currently in charge.
You are not the arbiter of what counts
Right back at you.
If a nation has a diaspora, it is an ethnostate
That's one of the stupidest things I've ever read and I've been paying close attention to US politics for decades! 😂
Trying to conceal overt racism behind improperly applied definitions is weak tea.
It's racist to NOT want ethnostates? As in states that by definition discriminate based on ethnicity? WTF have you been smoking??
To paraphrase your own blather, trying to conceal overt support for systemic discrimination and violence behind improperly applied definitions is weak tea.
people who have spread or been dispersed from their homeland.
"the Latin American diaspora has spread across the United States"
the dispersion of the Jewish people beyond Israel.
"a secular interpretation of Jewish history in antiquity and during the Diaspora
Just going off of what the first google result for those two terms says, I don’t agree with your conclusion that some of those countries are ethnostates. If, however, any or all of them did have a ruling party that included an ethnic background in order to join, then I’d be against that government.
It’s also possible to have a nuanced take on the subject. For example, if ethnostate “A” oppresses and kills members of a different ethnicity, while ethnostate “B” merely oppresses a different ethnicity, one can be against both governments while only being vocal about their opposition to ethnostate “A”, and not necessarily be amoral or hypocritical.
It's obvious you don't agree otherwise you would not have made your initial statement. Doesn't make you correct. All those listed are "Sovereign Nations" that identify as having a "people who have spread or been dispersed from their homeland". Ie.: Ethnostates.
You want to have a nuanced take on the subject? By all means, but, generally calling for the dissolution of all ethnostates is not 'nuanced'. What you mean to say is "Israeli Ethnostate" which is what I'm calling out.
You have not demonstrated that simply having citizens that live outside of the confines of their home state means that they come from an ethnostate, and even if it was, pointing that out doesn’t make the problems I (or anyone else) has with what the Israeli government is doing go away; hence the nuance of opposing ethnostates in general. If all the Jews in the world voluntarily moved to Israel, eliminating the diaspora, would that make Israel any less of an ethnostate?
In the case of the Israeli ethnostate, which I believe you are inferring things I have not implied, one can be opposed to the form of government in charge without being opposed to Jews having a country. Israel can exist without apartheid, without stealing land and other property from people of different ethnicities within (and without) their borders, and they can defend themselves without the wholesale slaughter and other human rights violations we’ve seen in the most recent conflict. One can call for a change in leadership positions, the leadership itself, dissolution of the current leadership party, dissolution of the existing governmental structure, anything in between or something else entirely, all while also calling for similar (or different) things from the Palestinian side as well, and in no way does holding one or more of those positions mean that one thinks what happened on October 7th or in any previous conflict between those parties is justified.
As an American, my opinions are obviously biased by our history of doing fucked up things to people that don’t look like those in power, and having participated in society for the last few decades drives home the importance of not including every citizen when condemning the actions of leadership.
What’s happening over there is wrong and it needs to stop, and an international coalition needs to be in charge of investigating everything that has happened and punishing the wrongdoers. Pretend I’m on whatever side you want, that’s what needs to happen.
You are confusing state policies with the State makeup and using an absurd version of the definition. The important facet of its definition is the peoples it identifies with are not associated necessarily to citizenship.
When the Russian government blames an invasion on russian peoples (identified solely by their language and culture) being mistreated in other countries they are an Ethnostate. If a nation welcomes its diaspora back and assures their citizenship solely based on their being the same peoples, they are an Ethnostate (most all the other nations I've listed) and it is reasonable to see that this definition holds whether they are 100% successful or not.
When you agreed that "All ethnostates should be dismantled" which ones came to your mind?
I'll only bring this up because you mentioned being American, that the US is actually on the precipice of becoming an Ethnostate based on common rhetoric used in their politics (American is becoming a cultural identity independent of citizenship).
I have not said anything that argues what is happening over their needs to continue. Just that I'd also take issue if you were arguing American Politics is immoral and so democracies need to be dismantled.
Yes. Nationalism is unnatural. Middle Eastern cities for the longest of times hosted people from diverse backgrounds. Even the tiny little Gaza has churches from different Christian sects that stood for centuries until Israel bombed them.
Every Arab country has some religious or ethnic or linguistic minority. Even Saudi Arabia has indigenous people who don’t speak Arabic, Faifi is one indigenous Semitic language spoken. And it also has religious minorities that aren’t Sunni Muslims. Saudi Arabia is not an ethnostate, all the diverse people are equally Saudi but it does privilege Najdis and Najdi culture.
When I was maybe 10 years old back in the 90s I asked my Dad why we put a bunch of people in a heavily populated area "when Montana is just sitting there empty. I mean, someone uses the land and we get like, taxes and museums and maybe an amusement park, right?"
It's an easy question so I'll answer it: there are no resources for people or there.
Lots of these places don't even have roads to access them. Meanwhile, the roads that we do have are in a state of catastrophic disrepair.
If you spread everyone out evenly, the resources would also be too spread out. It doesn't do any good to have one hospital say every 100 or 200 miles because then the resources have to be spread out as well. It makes more sense to have one large hospital in the city that has all the specialty, doctors and equipment, and then smaller medical centers outside the city. And it's that way with everything from food production to car repair to retail.
You'd get a museum out there in the middle of nowhere, and there would be less traffic at the good museum in the city where they have the rarest largest exhibits. Instead of having some good museums and some less good museums, you'd have a bunch of mediocre ones. Let your dad know!
Anyways, why would you "spread everyone out evenly?" We stuffed them into a tiny space that was already occupied. One assumes they'd be plopped into a town, which would centralize creating things like roads.
And the roads in Montana might suck, but there should be some kind of domestic package at play that would help from the federal level to create things like roads and water treatment and all that. Compared to how much we give Isreal now... could've put that money into development somewhere stateside.
Sorry for your loss. Maybe I misunderstood your hypothetical. For what we've paid Israel, it seems like we've gotten a war that has killed ~50,000 people. I would argue that it also gets us an order of peace in the middle east which so far has avoided a wider war involving larger regional powers that might kill 50 million people. There are more countries in Europe, Asia and North Africa than not which are likely to collapse if faced with tens of millions more more war refigees fleeing the Middle East. The world doesn't want another failed state in the Middle East, let alone multiple additional failed states in the Middle East and North Africa. I agree with your sentiment but it's not black and white.
For example, US is their biggest enabler and supporter.. So perhaps they can allow Israel to exist within US.
They can have Oklahoma Nebraska and Kansas. They'll have many times as much lebensraum and the ones currently in charge there have proven to not be responsible enough to run a state.
As a bonus, there's hardly any Muslim-Americans living there now, so evacuating them all to other states of their choosing before Israelis arrive to potentially endanger them should be completely doable!
A massive portion of Israelis have dual citizenship. If there was some kind of one-state solution that combined the two, returned much of the stolen land back to the original Palestinians and gave everyone full rights, those people would pack up and go voluntarily but also claim that they were violently forced out and that the whole thing is a pogrom.
It's beyond wishful thinking Christians want a Jewish Israel as much if not more than Zionist Jews because the end of days cannot happen without a Jewish Israel.
The US could end this today if Biden called Netanyahu and told him no more weapons until a ceasefire happens. It worked for both Reagan and Clinton in the past.
Biden is cucked by a right wing fundamentalist government. It’s sad.
So perhaps they can allow Israel to exist within US
It sounds like you're suggesting ethnically cleansing Jews from the region. How is that any better than suggesting that all Palestinians be moved to Qatar or Iran?
It sounds like you're suggesting ethnically cleansing Jews from the region. How is that any better than suggesting that all Palestinians be moved to Qatar or Iran?
It sounds like you’re trying to “gotcha” and twists my message/ word thing and I’m not going to take that bait. I’ll block you and if someone else has an actual argument without trying to these bait stuff I’ll respond.
You got me. I was trying to bait you into saying that ethnic cleansing is obviously a bad thing and we should apply a consistent standard to avoid dehumanizing rhetoric.