Fox Fire

lol @ moral flexibility. Morals are perceptual. I try to perceive both sides. Endlosung, the final solution, wasn't deliberated until 1942. The point I'm trying to make is that it was an act of desperation, not an original idea inherent to the Nazi ideology. That's why they called it the final solution. Equally, I don't think mass murder was an original idea of the Zionist ideology. They are both the result of a self defeating yet persistent idea that can only end in mass killing. But with that being said, and going off what you said, ethnic cleansing and indiscriminate murder of their own Arab minority is a defining point for the state of Israel is it not?

No, it's not. If so, the native American genocide and slavery is what defines the USA. Stalins purge defines the USSR and dead Palestinian children is what defines Israel. The holocaust was an action of Nazi Germanies leadership. It was not, not has it ever been, the definition of Nazi Germany. All killing aside, assuming neither the Nazis or Israelis killed anyone, they would still be the same states. So we've been through 6 pages now and all you've done is regurgitate the exact thing: Genocide (a word that you brought up, not me) = Nazi Germany. So if that's our definition of Nazi Germany, then our definition of Israel should be "indiscriminate murder of Palestinians". Fair?

Israel and Judaism are NOT one in the same. Zionism and Israel ARE one in the same. I know there are plenty on anti-Zionist Jews for example. I'm not blaming the religion itself. This thread is about nationalism, no? I just gave you an argument that Israel condones mass murder. 30 days in jail for murder and protecting their soldiers from international courts. indiscriminately killing hundreds of children and calling it justified. No, it's not genocide, but for the ten billionth time, that's not what defines Nazi Germany. Nazi Germany would have still been Nazi Germany without murdering Jews. In comparison, Israel would still be Israel without murdering Palestinians. It's their nationalist superiority complex that leads to their inhumanity. I really don't see why Jews need a state so badly that murdering hundreds of children in a few weeks is justified. Taoists don't have a state. We don't need one. Neither does any other religion.

I can mostly agree. Although Abrahamic religions all tell their people they are inherently special. That their version of God is what is just. Zionism is inherently tied to the Jewish religion, making the state the same way. A religious nationalism is a terrible idea and prone to conflict. Both sides have valid claim to the area, but I don't think either side has a claim in their current non-secular and divided forms. I'm not supporting the Palestinian side other than the fact that they are the ones who get massacred while everyone watches. Gaza is a terrible situation and Israel turning it into a blocked off cage "fish in a barrel" situation is plain a simply !@#$ed up. Yeah, it's a complex situation, but it's really just indiscriminate warfare. It's ridiculously stupid and has been going on far too long. This is why nationalism is stupid. Understandable, but stupid.

I mean it's the same thing as in it's state sanctioned mass murder. Israel is too busy invading itself to invade anyone else. Nope. Again, you're defining Nazism based on their acts of genocide. Genocide was never a core part of Nazi ideology. Neither was taking over Europe. Hitler didn't rally the support of millions by saying "Let's take over the world and murder millions of people". More like "We must preserve our culture and people. We deserve X, Y and Z because our people are inherently better". Zionism: "We must preserve our culture and people. Our people deserve this because God said we were chosen." Is that why Palestine was promised to both sides? "The will of the people was taken into account" Of course it was. After a shit ton of Jews came in and became the majority. That was the whole plan of Balfour.

Mkay... The Kingdom of Israel is not modern Israel. The two are not even related. That's like saying Turkey should be given to Russia or Greece. Trying to revert nations and cultures in given areas to ancient standards is something Hitler tried too. It was a stupid idea and it didn't work. Things from thousands of years ago are from thousands of years ago.

I quit! \o/ Again

Heard of it. The pictures I've seen make it look rather strange though. Samurai Soviet?!

I'm just giving you shit. It does sound like begging. But seriously, why were you deleted?

^

Umno. Ideological? Yes. Ideology of the state itself? Yes. Continue. Your problem is that you're focusing on genocide. Are Israelis putting people in gas chambers and committing mass industrialized murder? No. Are they interning, imprisoning and blatantly murdering their own minority population while stealing land under a nationalist supremacist ideology? Yes. Zionism is Jewish Nazism. Israel is the Jewish Nazi Germany. Do you get what I'm saying yet? The killing and atrocities may not be on the same scale, but it's still the same thing. Ethnic cleansing was part of the Zionist goal from its infancy.

Actually I didn't know your nation was deleted or why anyone should care.

Obama is a socialist. America remains capitalist. So what if Bernie is a socialist? I'm a libertarian socialist and this comment doesn't even make sense. Democrats are for large government, just like Republicans. They are the same party who's only disagreements tend to be minor social issues.

Christianity, specifically Catholicism has a history of anti-Zionism. The Zionists are not migrants. Migrants are people who move to other nations. The Zionists intend to move somewhere and forcibly make it their own nation. Depending on your use of the term racism, sure they may not be racist. Hence what I said: "arguably racist or ethnocentric at the very least." It's the Palestinians right to be there just as much as it is the Jews. Hence my stance against Zionism. Please don't assume that I support an Islamic state in Palestine, because I don't. It is. I've made my argument. Respond or piss off. I'm not playing this burden game with you.

I didn't say expansionist. I said colonialist. Arguably racist/ethnocentric because it simply is. I just explained why: "It's aim is to establish a Jewish nationalist state for what they call the "chosen people". They derive their authority over their Arab neighbors based on the idea that they are inherently superior to other religion/ethnicity/race." Zionism has been classified as colonialist and/or ethnocentric by countless people including academics, priests, historians, professors, etc. This includes Jews and even Israelis themselves. It's probably the single biggest criticism Zionism has ever had.

Foxburo condemns this council for it's centralized sexist policies. Clause 3 is completely unnecessary. There is absolutely no reason for it. The enforcement of this sexism in clause 9 is just as ridiculous. Foxburo refuses to sign this and does not recognize it's legitimacy.

Perhaps I can break this down into one sentence: Zionism carries the same concept as Nazism. Perhaps you should look up the definition of equivalent and stop assuming that Nazism means genocide. Zionism is a nationalist colonialist movement, arguably racist or ethnocentric at the very least. It's aim is to establish a Jewish nationalist state for what they call the "chosen people". They derive their authority over their Arab neighbors based on the idea that they are inherently superior to other religion/ethnicity/race. It's identical to the core beliefs of Nazism. The two states are just as similar. Abusing, imprisoning and interning their own minority populations to ensure their colonialism.

I just gave you 4 pages or argument. You're literally just asking me to repeat myself.

Your numbers are flawed. For one, he had (and still does) over 70,000 soldiers. You are unable to use 100% of your improvement capacity because your population is not high enough. We'll see if I can actually get 47,000 troops.

Sorry, I can't be bothered to repeat the 4 pages of argument. I'm not sure why you'd want to have the same debate 2 times in a row.

Already did.

Genocide =/= Nazi Germany or vice versa. The definition of Nazi Germany is not the definition of genocide. I never said they had to do everything the Nazis did, exactly the way they did it. I simply compared the two states. You seem to have a fixation on something I never mentioned.

Balfour was the framework for Israel. Most everything that followed (like western support for Israel) was a product of that. Murder is illegal in Israel, but that isn't stopping the murdering from happening or sentiment by the Israeli people that murdering Palestinians is justified. It's also not stopping the government from stealing more and more land as well as blatantly violating their very own agreements, only showing support for Palestinian independence in cases they politically benefit from. The IDFs unspoken policy on Gaza is that anything inside Gaza is a threat. Indiscriminate killing is permissible to IDF itself. The soldiers are never punished unless their crimes are openly exposed and challenged. In such cases, the punishments are usually laughable, to the point that it's simply not even punishment. The government will almost immediately claim that any particular killing was justified before any investigation takes place. There have been some pretty ridiculous instances of blatant murder where the killers were never punished in any fashion. Such as killing Arabs minding their own business for holding gardening tools. The government also blocked investigations of killings during the second antifada, literally picking and choosing which killings would even be investigated. Taysir Hayb is an example of how IDF soldiers are punished for murdering western citizens. Less than 1 year in prison for blatantly murdering a British citizen. The only reason he even got that is because the dude was British. However, when Palestinian children are murdered, the killer probably gets 30 days in jail and a slap on the wrist. The reality is that IDF is literally allowed, by the Israeli government, to murder people. The "knife in the back" policy is policy is a lie and the Israeli government actively organizes to prevent Israelis from being prosecuted by international courts for war crimes. Instead, they should probably organize to prevent committing war crimes to begin with. But Palestinian lives have no value to them and they simply do not care if their soldiers slaughter them. The only reason Israel pretends to punish their soldiers is for PR. In reality, it's a lie. I never even used the word genocide or made a comparison between the two. I used the term "ethnic cleansing" because I meant "ethnic cleansing".

Jewish settlers came from all over the world over a long period of time. However Balfour was the foreign idea that established Israel. Palestine after WWI was British territory and they controlled who moved in or out. The British ignored their own migration quotas because moving Zionists into Palestine was the whole idea. It wasn't until the Arabs started revolting that Britain actually started limiting migration. They revolted for good reason. Britain had simultaneously promised Palestine to the Arabs but lied. The end result is several major world powers promoting a hundred years of war against Palestinian Arabs for no other reason than the fact they live there. It was a terrible idea that met opposition immediately. That opposition was ignored and remains ignored to this day. The situation with Israel-Palestine can be described as ethnic cleansing if you ask me. "But Israel is democratic and lets Muslims live there!" Yeah! In a permanent state of disdain in their own home! Problem is, if authority were given to Muslims, the ethnic cleansing would likely reverse itself. However this problem would not even exist if not for a foreign conspiracy. Palestine should have either been given to the Arabs or turned into a secular hub. The seeds for a never ending conflict should have been apparent. Securing the holy land for western interests has never produced quick and easy results. Or any results, really. Morality is subjective. Israel may not be a model of Nazi Germany. It may not be a psychotic dictatorship. But it is a Jewish state forcibly driving people off their own land and slaughtering those who resist. The IDF is well known for indiscriminate slaughter and even blatantly shooting children. ISIS is doing the same thing. Should they have a caliphate? I mean after all, a caliphate is fundamental Muslim tradition. Fact is, stateless nations exist. Not every group gets their own state. Jews however have an exception because of Balfour. The United States fiercely defends Israel while at the same time, support Georgian troops killing Russian civilians that want their own independence. Israel is supported solely out of western convenience. They have a free pass on war crimes and inhumanity because they are a thorn in the Arab world we are trying to dictate.

Hey look, Lannan got crushed on his own callout.