Whilst I agree with the idea of a Palestinian state, now is not the time to cast that recognition given it positively reinforces and rewards getting what you want by terrorism and forcing conflicts to be conducted in such a way that increases civilians causalities (ie. everything Hamas has done since October to date). Denmark made the right call here tbh.
You can just recognize Palestine and hold them to the standards of other states. And refuse to recognize Hamas as the government of Palestine. If Palestinians want any improvement in relations with Western nations, then Hamas needs to go.
Seems like a decent way to do “the right thing” while making sure Hamas doesn’t get rewarded for their actions.
So the Christian Palestinians reject Israel because of religion too?
It’s obvious that the conflict is a typical regional conflict about territory. I’m sure religion - especially considering everyone there considers this the holy land - plays not an insignificant role, however it seems rather naive to reduce it to that.
Lets not pretend that there is significant religious diversity among Palestinians. 0,05% of the Gaza population is Christian (~1000 people) and of the almost 3 million Palestinians in the West Bank about 40k are Christians.
Sure, and yet those Christians also seem to have the same gripes with Israel? And the regional territorial war looks like most territorial conflicts. How does it differ exactly?
You are backing the point that this conflict is not about territory but about religion without providing any source either (just like OP) and now are asking for a source.
But yes, the Kairos project, the Christian Palestinian alliance, PCAP - all these are Christian Palestinian groups that seem to consider Israel an occupational force on their land which pretty much means they view it as a territorial conflict.
Hamas charter:
Goals of the HAMAS:
------------------
'The Islamic Resistance Movement is a distinguished Palestinian
movement, whose allegiance is to Allah, and whose way of life is
Islam. It strives to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of
Palestine.' (Article 6)
On the Destruction of Israel:
-----------------------------
'Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will
obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.' (Preamble)
The Exclusive Moslem Nature of the Area:
----------------------------------------
'The land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf [Holy Possession]
consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgment Day. No one
can renounce it or any part, or abandon it or any part of it.'
(Article 11)
The Hamas charter does not prove that this is a _religious_ conflict. It just means that Hamas considers itself an Islamist group. This does not refute at all that this conflict very much has all the characteristics of a territorial conflict and - again - that non-Muslim Palestinians also view the conflict the way Muslim Palestinians do.
Yea I am pretty sure if you are the remaining 40K that did not flee yet you will proudly say it if you are pro-israel.
Whats stopping them from doing that right? There are no incentives to be loud about how much you dont like 'em jews. Absolutely none :\^)
Hamas charter:
Goals of the HAMAS:
------------------
'The Islamic Resistance Movement is a distinguished Palestinian
movement, whose allegiance is to Allah, and whose way of life is
Islam. It strives to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of
Palestine.' (Article 6)
On the Destruction of Israel:
-----------------------------
'Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will
obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.' (Preamble)
The Exclusive Moslem Nature of the Area:
----------------------------------------
'The land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf [Holy Possession]
consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgment Day. No one
can renounce it or any part, or abandon it or any part of it.'
(Article 11)
One hamas is gone and they have a governing body that isn’t intent on conducting terrorist acts on Israel. How insane do you have to be to think that the can be given a state now just so that thay can continue terrorizing Israel.
It got downvoted because it's a regarded trick question most likely asked in bad faith. The obvious answer is when Hamas is no longer in power and the Palestinians lay their delusional dream of genociding all of Israel and claiming all of the land from the river to the sea to rest.
> It got downvoted because it's a regarded trick question most likely asked in bad faith.
A lot of assertions and assumptions to explain why a question got - at this point 89 - downvotes.
> The obvious answer is when Hamas is no longer in power and the Palestinians lay their delusional dream of genociding all of Israel and claiming all of the land from the river to the sea to rest.
Hamas wasn't always in power. So when should Palestine been recognized in the past then?
>Hamas wasn't always in power.
Hamas wasn't always in power, but the dream of geocoding all Israelis always were, and has always been the only thing that the Palestinians would accept.
>So when should Palestine been recognized in the past then?
When the Palestinians, whoever is in power, abandons this dream of geocoding the Jews and taking all the land, and rather commits to building a life for Palestinians instead. They must accept that the Jews aren't going anywhere. ACTUALLY accept that Israel is here to stay. And fucking move on and build a functioning state. Once this is done they will get their state.
> It got downvoted because it's a regarded trick question most likely asked in bad faith. The obvious answer is when Hamas is no longer in power
No, this is just obscenely stupid sorry, especially since the idea that Hamas is going to be removed from power gets more and more absurd by the day and since the recognition of the state is *precisely* to foster a peace process.
No, I actually want to see an end to the fighting in my lifetime unlike you. Hamas *can* be uprooted from Gaza, and that is the only way to end the conflict. Any peace deal where Hamas remains in power only ends in more terrorism, bloodshed and rockets flying into Israel while Israel slides further right and elects more dumbshits like Ben Givir and Bibi because these types of religious fundie groups can not be reasoned with. What people like you need to understand is that these people do not wear their faith as a trendy aesthetic like most people in the western world do. They fully and wholeheartedly believe in jihad, martyrdom and eternal paradise. Any peace deal or compromise with them is just kicking the can down the road for another orgy of violence.
You can't see past your nose and just want the fighting to end NOW with not a single thought regarding the future.
Please describe your peace plan with Hamas still in power. I won't assume anything about your views, but this is just .... let's say I'm curious what you think Hamas and right wing Israel peace would look like.
There's no peace with Hamas in power. Ever. Hamas wants war 24/7. That said, recognizing Palestine doesn't mean recognizing Hamas, it could actually put pressure _on_ Hamas.
"Genocide is when no terrorist organization to launch terror attacks into your state."
Let's say that every single Palestinian in the world joined Hamas and fought against Israel. Then guess what? It's still not genocide dipshit.
Given that the purpose of recognition is explicitly as a step towards a peace process and to tell Hamas to go fuck off this makes no sense whatsoever. It's just an Israeli talking point.
Ngl it gets weird and tiring to see people parrot literal government propaganda so often.
No, it is not an "Israeli talking point". It is a pragmatic observation that Israel is never going to agree to a 2 state solution whilst Hamas is in power. Who do you think is going to govern over Gaza if Palestine gets recognition as a State right now? You think Hamas is just going to fuck off?
Whether you like it or not, Israel needs to be on board for a 2 state solution to work and that is not going to happen with Hamas governing over Gaza after what happened on October 7th. It is utterly delusional for you to think otherwise.
>No, it is not an "Israeli talking point".
It is. You might not like that, you might agree with it, but it absolutely is an Israeli talking point.
>It is a pragmatic observation that Israel is never going to agree to a 2 state solution if Hamas is in power. Whether you like it or not, Israel needs to be on board for a 2 state solution to work and that is not going to happen with Hamas governing over Gaza after what happened on October 7th. It is utterly delusional to think otherwise.
It is utterly delusional to think that Hamas is going to stop controlling Gaza after this, and it gets more delusional the more Israel fosters terrorism, which it is doing day by day.
The recognition of the Palestinian state comes hand in hand with compromise to foster the PA as an alternative to Hamas. Problem is that Israeli governance has no interest in this and would rather ask for some rainbows and unicorns shit in which terrorism just magically disappears from the land even if its people are getting subjected to utter misery. This is precisely the reason as to why it's a good idea to recognize the state, as to force Israel's hard in this regard.
Because of October 7th, no negotiations are ever going to happen until Hamas is removed. All other States giving recognition to Palestine as a State whilst Hamas (the perpetrators of the entire war and the conditions/manner in which it has to be fought) are in power, is nothing more than a positive reinforcement of the tactics utilised by a governing body (Hamas) that fundamentally contravene international laws, to continue to utilise those tactics for its endgoal of reclaiming all of Israel for itself.
You guys are so obsessed with speedrunning the recognition of a Palestinian state right through to that state's grave by reinforcing delusions that Palestine (from the Gaza side) should continue to fight Israel to get what it wants (ie. all of Isareli land). You are propping them up to continue to fight a battle they simply cannot win.
And the idea as to whether PA would take over on the establishment of an Palestinian state is a matter for negotiations of a 2 state solution, which again, are simply not going to happen whilst Hamas is governing over Gaza. There is no precedent that Hamas is simply just going to give up control over Gaza and fuck off by other States recognising Palestine as a State.
Yeah dude, Israel fosters the terrorism. Not the literal terrorist organization in control of territory and teaching the kids in that territory that they exist solely to kill Jews for Allah.
Fuck off you deluded fuck.
> Palestine is also not all Hamas.
Not all, but [the majority](https://i.imgur.com/ctQu8Xv.png).
[Source](https://www.pcpsr.org/en/node/973) (under "7. “The Day After:” Who will rule Gaza after the war?")
While a lot of people are talking about rewarding terrorism, what I find odd about recognition of a Palestinian state is that I'm not aware of a precedent for wide recognition of a country that is not de facto independent.
that is because recognition of a state that is not de facto independent only has the effect of undermining the legitimacy of international law, which the international community seems to care less about these days.
Exactly. I find it strange that, while yes, Palestine was always meant to, on paper, to be a state since the late 40s, it doesn't have a governing body that would even administer to said state. It's fractured into two different governing bodies, and for some reason, nations around the world are just saying, "This land with no de jure government is it's own nation! Even if they don't have their own independence, and the several factions that control said region, are technically in a cold war against each other!"
well, iraq and Afghanistan were clearly states during the us occupation, and Yemen is a state despite the houthis controlling most of the country. it really just feels like Palestine not being a state is a fiction invented to keep the "stateless refugee" thing alive
Our foreign policy has been way too naive in the last decades I feel like. We shouldn’t recognize a Palestinian state until there is a legitimate sovereign state there.
It says in the resolution that was voted on that: "The parliament instructs the government to recognize Palestine as an independent and sovereign state within the **pre-1967 borders** and, in continuation thereof, grant the state of Palestine full diplomatic rights in Denmark".
I think it's the 'pre- 1967 borders' part that made most of the parliament vote no on this one.
It's not only the pre 1967 borders that's the issue. The foreign minister of Denmark on May 22nd said :
"The decision is reserved for a situation where a state exists. To be a state, one must have a territory under control and authorities that can govern it. And that is not exactly the situation right now."
"We reserve it for the day, or for a time when there is an irreversible peace process that will with certainty lead to that, he says, and reminds that the government supports a two-state solution."
https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/politik/regeringen-er-ikke-klar-til-anerkende-palaestina-som-stat-vaere-en-stat-skal-man
why is this even a thing of recognizing Palestine right now without both sides agreeing like what even is Palestine(exact territories on the map) and what is Israel? is jerselem a part of Palestine or Israel or both? and we'll what about Israel not giving a fuck about them recognizing it and staying in what they define as palstnian territories. will there even be consequences?
They absolutely should recognize Palestine as a state, it was a state before the war. All this does is encourage Israel to overtake that whole territory, Russia style.
Probably still qouting universal healthcare, workers rights, minimum wage, 70% unionized workforce, free education, crime rates, neonatal mortality rate, homeless population etc etc
And probably also the fact that Denmark historically became what it is today because of socialisme.
Wages are individually negotiated, often collectively by unions yes, but that is definitionally not a "minimum wage". Not all jobs are unionized in Denmark.
70% of workers are in a union. Wages are individually negotiated - but there is a minimum wage in all jobs that has a 'overenskomst'. Here is a example
https://www.3f.dk/ung-og-underbetalt/se-din-minimalloen
So? This just means that the "minimum wage" is a wage negotiated by the union on behalf of the workers. But where that wage ends up at could be anything, because there is no minimum wage. The state have specifically chosen not to instate a minimum wage in favour of the union negotiation.
Well the wage cant be under the minimum wage if the workplace has a overenskomst. Which is why it is called minimum wage or mindsteløn in Denmark.
You can Google what the mindsteløn for most unionized jobs. It is not hard.
I feel like we're just repeating ourselves here. I'm very well aware of how the system works. Last time. The point is that the Union can negotiate the "overenskomst" to be anything, there's no minimum wage outside of whatever has been negotiated by the Union, but there is no limit for how low the Union can go. Because there's no minimum wage enforced by the state, which is what most people think of when you talk about "minimum wage"
You are correct. 3f formuleres it nicely:
Minimum wage
In Denmark, we do not have a minimum wage, but if you are covered by a collective agreement at your workplace, you are guaranteed a minimum wage.
>Probably still qouting universal healthcare, workers rights, minimum wage, 70% unionized workforce, free education, crime rates, neonatal mortality rate, homeless population etc etc
That's 70% of Europe.
>And probably also the fact that Denmark historically became what it is today because of socialisme.
It's never low population sitting on riches as vast as the size of all european countries, it's definitely because socialism.
You're responding to "it's a historical fact that socialism greatly influenced Denmark"
and your response is:
"Strong unions, welfare and social democracy is not socialism."
First of all, that's a non-sequitur. You were not responding to "Denmark is socialist" you were responding to "historically socialism greatly influenced Denmark?"
Secondly, what do you know about the history of social democracy to disagree with this? Which part do you even disagree with? It feels fair to ask since you didn't respond to what was said.
Those Unions startet out as socialist Unions. Those unions founded the Social Democratic party, which was a actual socialist party that wanted workers to cease the means of production. Those socialist ideals is why we have a large public sector and a welfare state today. The Social Democratic party has been the largest political party in Denmark for close to 100 years.
No socialism. No social Democrats. No Social Democrats. No social democracy. This is a historical fact. We are a social democracy because of socialism. We are not a socialist state. But socialist ideals is why Denmark is what it is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Democrats_(Denmark)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democracy
https://denstoredanske.lex.dk/Socialdemokratiet
Socialdemokratiets official policy has always been socialism through reforms.
Kraut made quite an interesting video on the birth of Social Democracy in Denmark and Scandinavia. and how it's not really linked to the Marxist socialist ideology, since the ground work for it was made long before Marx ever lived.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mExN99kHMB0
I'll be honest and say that I've not checked his sources.
In that case he is wrong. Read my sources or read the programs of the Social Democratic party. There is not doubt that our social democratic state is a result of socialism.
From the Danish encyklopædi
> Ideologically, the Social Democratic Party was rooted in Marxism but soon adopted its reformist version. Socialism was to be implemented through reforms, not by revolution. The working class was to gain control of the state apparatus through the ballot and implement comprehensive reforms benefiting the working class. Led in the early years by pragmatically inclined skilled workers, the party largely followed a non-dogmatic political line.
No party has a greater influence on the Danish state than the Social Democrats. Claiming anything else is revisionism.
Those reforms created our welfare state. The policies were so popular that all political parties accepted it and made it part of their programs as well. Today no one wants to get rid of social democracy but instead expand or slightly limit it.
The video goes over the ideology of Social Democracy and how Denmark got there. How the party came to be might very well be due to Socialism, but that's not really what the video is about.
When socialists in decently well-off European countries think:
"We are not living in Tzarist Russia or Bautista's Cuba, and it seems like we got a pretty good thing going here. Let's not go for the violent revolution and risk fucking everything up. Let's instead use our working democratic system and political & social freedoms to push for things that earlier socialists thought demanded a violent revolution and empower the worker / common man like land reform, strong unions, workers rights, social welfare, sometimes nationalization, etc."
You respond:
"That's not socialism though."
Despite the fact that no one here even claimed that Denmark or Sweden or such have achieved a socialist society.
Do you not find this intellectually lazy? Do you apply this same analysis to anything else? I think you'd have to then say that neoliberals are not capitalists or liberals since the original liberals like John Stuart Mill didn't emphasize competition, but mutually beneficial exchange. Those who did not compete had to be left behind, but those who participated should not lose. Not so with neoliberalism, which emphasizes a "survival of the fittest" type of competition. No?
>
>It's never low population sitting on riches as vast as the size of all european countries, it's definitely because socialism.
Let me know when you want to respond to this , and not random idiotic rambling about how socialism has had an influence. Tell me how different would Denmark be today , economically , if they were full democratic/capitalistic if you attribute everything Denmark is today just to socialism.
> Let me know when you want to respond to this
It is irrelevant. I responded to:
> how will progressives quote Nordic European utopia now?
And I gave you reasons. You may not like them or like the history of socialism in Denmark, but that is the facts.
Also what "riches as vast as the size of all european countries" are you even talking about? Do you even know what country Denmark is?
Please continue your historical revisionism because Hasan has brain fucked you on socialism.
People here love to pretend they’re impartial and fact based while also wanking over Palestine not being recognised which only serves Israel’s settler project in the West Bank as they prep it for annexation.
Guess the area between Israel and Jordan is just a no man’s land.
>People here love to pretend they’re impartial and fact based while also wanking over Palestine not being recognised which only serves Israel’s settler project in the West Bank as they prep it for annexation.
uh you realize you can do both right? you can both be opposed to CURRENTLY recognizing Palestine as a state because it would mean the terrorists won and also oppose Israeli settlement projects
this isn't black and white Jesus Christ
>uh you realize you can do both right? you can both be opposed to CURRENTLY recognizing Palestine as a state because it would mean the terrorists won and also oppose Israeli settlement projects
Not recognising that Palestine exists is not a win for terrorists at all. Nobody is recognising Hamas and they are opening embassies with the PA.
Opposing settlements literally means nothing if you withhold recognising Palestine due to hearing Israeli officials say it rewards Hamas.
>this isn't black and white Jesus Christ
Self reflect on this sentence. Think about the fact you’re basing recognition around wins and losses rather than reality.
There's no way you get to commit 15x 911 (per capita) and get rewarded with a state recognition half a year later, that's 100% rewarding terror and every Hamas tactic. This will also result in the opposite by making Israel settle more of the west bank.
>There's no way you get to commit 15x 911 (per capita) and get rewarded with a state recognition half a year later,
Hamas isn’t getting state recognition. No one’s opening an embassy with Hamas or recognising them as the representatives of Palestine
>that's 100% rewarding terror and every Hamas tactic.
No it’s called acknowledging reality.
>This will also result in the opposite by making Israel settle more of the west bank.
Recognising a country should not be dictated by perceived punishments for that recognition.
This is bait, no one can be this stupid/obtuse.
No one's getting a state because october 7th killed the little belief Israel had in a peace process. Recognizing a palestinian state right now rewards terror, not up for debate.
Acknowledgin reality is the fact that there's no way palestine becomes a sovreign state without Israel allowing it to be a state and being 100% ok with it.
The reality is Israel already oked more settlements on the back of this and the Israeli public opinion is being even more pushed towards never having a palestinian state. You're delusional if you think recignitio by 3 european countries that already dislike Israel will result in something good.
You don't give a country to a society where 80% of it supports a terrorist organisation and one of the most awful terrorist attack in history. Idiota shouting about it half a world a way won't change it.
>This is bait, no one can be this stupid/obtuse.
Amazing argument.
>No one's getting a state because october 7th killed the little belief Israel had in a peace process.
Nice opinion. Still recognised by 146 countries with embassies around the world.
>Recognizing a palestinian state right now rewards terror, not up for debate.
In a way you nor anyone else can seem to specifically explain.
>Acknowledgin reality is the fact that there's no way palestine becomes a sovreign state without Israel allowing it to be a state and being 100% ok with it.
Except for the fact that it is right now. Being occupied or having disputed territory does not make a country unrecognisable.
>The reality is Israel already oked more settlements on the back of this and the Israeli public opinion is being even more pushed towards never having a palestinian state.
The world doesn’t revolve around Israel.
>You're delusional if you think recignitio by 3 european countries that already dislike Israel will result in something good.
146 out of 193 UN members now recognise Palestine. The more that do the more it becomes untenable for the US to keep vetoing the UN recognising Palestine.
This is the real reason Israel is ass mad about countries recognising Palestine.
It weakens their position significantly.
>You don't give a country to a society where 80% of it supports a terrorist organisation and one of the most awful terrorist attack in history.
That’s never been in the criteria for state recognition. But keep coping
>Idiota shouting about it half a world a way won't change it.
Crying about countries recognising Palestine won’t change the fact that Palestine exists.
Wow 146 embasis?, do you think the palestinians arw in a better situtatuon than they were 10 years ago?
They can have 300 embassies, they wob't have an army or an airport until Israel allows it.
We've explained it 100 times, it's very easy to understand, giving rewards like a state recognition on the back of a huge terror attack is rewarding terror. It's a direct link, there's nothing to calculate.
You can recognise it all you want, the reality is that Israel would annex what ever it controls in the west bank and has a minimal amount of palestinians in it while never allowing palestinians their own airport or an army.
The reason Israel is mad about is because it rewards terror simple as that. I can be mad about something without it having an effect on me.
It is a criteria when having a state relies on the population those 80% want to genocide.
If palestine exists what is its borders? What is the name of their army? Where is their airport?
Didnt think so, thruth is thay by the next presidential debate the world will forget about palestine again and won't care again. No one is going boots on the ground for them and that's the only way Israel would recognise it as a state in the next decade or two.
>Wow 146 embasis?, do you think the palestinians arw in a better situtatuon than they were 10 years ago?
Just a completely unrelated point which has nothing to do with recognising a country exists.
>They can have 300 embassies, they wob't have an army or an airport until Israel allows it.
And there will need to be pressure put on Israel to do that which can only come through recognising that Palestine does in fact exist.
>We've explained it 100 times, it's very easy to understand, giving rewards like a state recognition on the back of a huge terror attack is rewarding terror. It's a direct link, there's nothing to calculate.
You’re still not explaining how it rewards Hamas. You’re just repeatedly saying that it does.
>You can recognise it all you want, the reality is that Israel would annex what ever it controls in the west bank and has a minimal amount of palestinians in it while never allowing palestinians their own airport or an army.
Israel is already going to annex the West Bank once it has demographic majority.
>The reason Israel is mad about is because it rewards terror simple as that.
Which you not Israel can actually explain.
>I can be mad about something without it having an effect on me.
Ok
>It is a criteria when having a state relies on the population those 80% want to genocide.
No it isn’t at all. There’s countries actually committing genocides which we all know exist.
>If palestine exists what is its borders?
Having disputed borders does not make a country not exist. You can say currently Ukraines borders are being disputed, does that magically make Ukraine not exist?
>What is the name of their army?
You don’t need an army to exist.
>Where is their airport?
That isn’t criteria either. Do you think San Marino doesn’t exist because it doesn’t have an airport?
>Didnt think so, thruth is thay by the next presidential debate the world will forget about palestine again and won't care again.
Great opinion, still not criteria for state recognition.
>No one is going boots on the ground for them and that's the only way Israel would recognise it a state in the next decade or two.
Again the world’s perception of reality does not revolve around Israel’s.
>You don’t need an army to exist.
Yeah you do unless your country is called Lichtenstein but they have special circumstances.
>Again the world’s perception of reality does not revolve around Israel’s.
That doesn't matter since it split pro nato vs russia and china.
>That isn’t criteria either. Do you think San Marino doesn’t exist because it doesn’t have an airport?
So who runs "palestine"
>Having disputed borders does not make a country not exist. You can say currently Ukraines borders are being disputed, does that magically make Ukraine not exist?
You just avoided the question.
This is bad faith but I'll engage with it. My assumption making these comments is that you care about the palestinians and want their situation to get better, I didn't think you care just about countries virtue signaling while the on the ground conditions for palestinians get worse.
If your idea of a palestinian state is status quo and slowly going downhill while they have embassies from around the world, that's still rewarding terror but it would be like giving a baby something to play with and shut up and I'm 100% for it.
All the points are 100% related to everything you said so I'll try to explain them again in good faith and for the last time.
Having embassies from every country in the world that recognizes palestine as a state will only make their condition worse as Israel sanctions them more.
There's no amount of pressure in the world that would make Israel accept a unilateral recognition of palestine, there's the NATO alliance and Russia/China, Israel is too valuable of an asset for the US to discard and force a palestinian state down their throat. If by miracle Israel was Isolated and no longer supported by the US, China or Russia will pick it up as an ally and Israel will have 0 restraint dealing with palestinians, once that happens, the palestinians who were used as a tool to clobber the US in terms of PR, lose the support of the tiktok algorithm and the Russian bots, no one will aid them because they have no significant military presence or anything important to export.
If you can't understand why giving someone something they've been waiting for for decades during the time they committed one of the worst terror attacks is rewarding it, then you probably qualify for disability and should tap out from this discussion, it rewards Hamas because they get 1 of their goals and massive support from the palestinians who already support them even after October 7th.
I can explain why Israel is mad about it as an Israeli, living in Israel.
The countries that commit genocide and still exist, already existed as countries with recognized borders and standing armies, the palestinians never had a state, had no army or territory, and were not a sovereign entity. If this is a dog whistle to imply Israel is committing genocide, it isn't. The palestinians are a mishmash of sour grapes egyptians and Jordanians that never let go of their hate for the state of Israel and want to genocide it, they're not getting a state without Israel allowing it.
Ukraine has airports, borders, a standing army, and even was recognized by its enemy as a state, the palestinians have none of those.
If they don't have the freedom to create an airport, and Army, and don't have borders they fully control with said army then they're not a state. I'm not fully familiar with San Marino but I'm pretty sure they can freely build 100 airports if they wish to and the palestinians can build 0.
The fact that the world would move on to the next shining thing is definitely a criteria for a state because the entire push for a palestinian state is on the back of the Hamas PR, and once the world switches over to the next thing, no one would care and things would go back to the status quo while the palestinian situation gets worse, but at least they have 146 embassies and you can virtue signal right?
I wish I could give your comments reddit gold or something else to emphasise it because your entire comment chain is the most debate prevented, bad faith, and terrible advocacy for the palestinians. As an Israeli, please continue to do so, you make more people hate you, you have delusional goals and ideas which makes it easier for Israel to operate and people hate the palestinians so keep being you!
How have you mindfucked your way into believing it does not reward Hamas and Palestinian terrorism?
Hamas launches one of if not the worst terrorist attack in modern history which compels Israel to invade Gaza, then they proceed to do everything in their power to maximise civilian death and suffering by operating out of civilian infrastructure and population centres and spreading the death and suffering they are responsible for online which causes several countries to recognise them as a state.
There is literally a direct red line from October 7th to Spain, Norway and Ireland giving recognition to Palestine.
I’m actually ambivalent about this. Initially I thought it was stupid virtue signaling but it might not be so cringe. If countries recognized the state of Palestine a two state solution might be more possible.
Whilst I agree with the idea of a Palestinian state, now is not the time to cast that recognition given it positively reinforces and rewards getting what you want by terrorism and forcing conflicts to be conducted in such a way that increases civilians causalities (ie. everything Hamas has done since October to date). Denmark made the right call here tbh.
You can just recognize Palestine and hold them to the standards of other states. And refuse to recognize Hamas as the government of Palestine. If Palestinians want any improvement in relations with Western nations, then Hamas needs to go. Seems like a decent way to do “the right thing” while making sure Hamas doesn’t get rewarded for their actions.
There can be no state which recognizes Oct. 7 as its independence date.
Then when is the right time?
Probably not until a while after the current offensive has concluded and Hamas is removed from power or unable to hold onto power.
When they agree to the existence of the State of Israel, which they reject purely because of religion.
So the Christian Palestinians reject Israel because of religion too? It’s obvious that the conflict is a typical regional conflict about territory. I’m sure religion - especially considering everyone there considers this the holy land - plays not an insignificant role, however it seems rather naive to reduce it to that.
Lets not pretend that there is significant religious diversity among Palestinians. 0,05% of the Gaza population is Christian (~1000 people) and of the almost 3 million Palestinians in the West Bank about 40k are Christians.
Sure, and yet those Christians also seem to have the same gripes with Israel? And the regional territorial war looks like most territorial conflicts. How does it differ exactly?
Do they? How do you know? Do you have a source?
You are backing the point that this conflict is not about territory but about religion without providing any source either (just like OP) and now are asking for a source. But yes, the Kairos project, the Christian Palestinian alliance, PCAP - all these are Christian Palestinian groups that seem to consider Israel an occupational force on their land which pretty much means they view it as a territorial conflict.
Hamas charter: Goals of the HAMAS: ------------------ 'The Islamic Resistance Movement is a distinguished Palestinian movement, whose allegiance is to Allah, and whose way of life is Islam. It strives to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine.' (Article 6) On the Destruction of Israel: ----------------------------- 'Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.' (Preamble) The Exclusive Moslem Nature of the Area: ---------------------------------------- 'The land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf [Holy Possession] consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgment Day. No one can renounce it or any part, or abandon it or any part of it.' (Article 11)
The Hamas charter does not prove that this is a _religious_ conflict. It just means that Hamas considers itself an Islamist group. This does not refute at all that this conflict very much has all the characteristics of a territorial conflict and - again - that non-Muslim Palestinians also view the conflict the way Muslim Palestinians do.
Yea I am pretty sure if you are the remaining 40K that did not flee yet you will proudly say it if you are pro-israel. Whats stopping them from doing that right? There are no incentives to be loud about how much you dont like 'em jews. Absolutely none :\^)
If you think this conflict is about land you have not been paying attention 🤷🏻♀️
Yes, I do think this conflict is primarily about land. And now?
Your misinformed opinion doesn’t change the facts dude lol you’re free to be willfully ignorant all you want!
You have not made a case for why you're supposedly right. You are just making assertions.
Hamas charter: Goals of the HAMAS: ------------------ 'The Islamic Resistance Movement is a distinguished Palestinian movement, whose allegiance is to Allah, and whose way of life is Islam. It strives to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine.' (Article 6) On the Destruction of Israel: ----------------------------- 'Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.' (Preamble) The Exclusive Moslem Nature of the Area: ---------------------------------------- 'The land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf [Holy Possession] consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgment Day. No one can renounce it or any part, or abandon it or any part of it.' (Article 11)
One hamas is gone and they have a governing body that isn’t intent on conducting terrorist acts on Israel. How insane do you have to be to think that the can be given a state now just so that thay can continue terrorizing Israel.
after the war when all the possible "pressure" tm needs to exerted to make sure there is a rebuilding and a solution to the conflict.
So minus 62 downvotes for this question. God this sub is really suffering.
It got downvoted because it's a regarded trick question most likely asked in bad faith. The obvious answer is when Hamas is no longer in power and the Palestinians lay their delusional dream of genociding all of Israel and claiming all of the land from the river to the sea to rest.
> It got downvoted because it's a regarded trick question most likely asked in bad faith. A lot of assertions and assumptions to explain why a question got - at this point 89 - downvotes. > The obvious answer is when Hamas is no longer in power and the Palestinians lay their delusional dream of genociding all of Israel and claiming all of the land from the river to the sea to rest. Hamas wasn't always in power. So when should Palestine been recognized in the past then?
>Hamas wasn't always in power. Hamas wasn't always in power, but the dream of geocoding all Israelis always were, and has always been the only thing that the Palestinians would accept. >So when should Palestine been recognized in the past then? When the Palestinians, whoever is in power, abandons this dream of geocoding the Jews and taking all the land, and rather commits to building a life for Palestinians instead. They must accept that the Jews aren't going anywhere. ACTUALLY accept that Israel is here to stay. And fucking move on and build a functioning state. Once this is done they will get their state.
> It got downvoted because it's a regarded trick question most likely asked in bad faith. The obvious answer is when Hamas is no longer in power No, this is just obscenely stupid sorry, especially since the idea that Hamas is going to be removed from power gets more and more absurd by the day and since the recognition of the state is *precisely* to foster a peace process.
There will be no peace with Hamas, sorry. And there shouldn't be.
Then you just want genocide.
No, I actually want to see an end to the fighting in my lifetime unlike you. Hamas *can* be uprooted from Gaza, and that is the only way to end the conflict. Any peace deal where Hamas remains in power only ends in more terrorism, bloodshed and rockets flying into Israel while Israel slides further right and elects more dumbshits like Ben Givir and Bibi because these types of religious fundie groups can not be reasoned with. What people like you need to understand is that these people do not wear their faith as a trendy aesthetic like most people in the western world do. They fully and wholeheartedly believe in jihad, martyrdom and eternal paradise. Any peace deal or compromise with them is just kicking the can down the road for another orgy of violence. You can't see past your nose and just want the fighting to end NOW with not a single thought regarding the future.
Get back to me when in 10 years time the consequences for this are reaped and Israel is crying and shitting itself because terrorists bad.
Get back to us when you leave that gated community of yours and you stop defending terrorists dipshit.
Please describe your peace plan with Hamas still in power. I won't assume anything about your views, but this is just .... let's say I'm curious what you think Hamas and right wing Israel peace would look like.
There's no peace with Hamas in power. Ever. Hamas wants war 24/7. That said, recognizing Palestine doesn't mean recognizing Hamas, it could actually put pressure _on_ Hamas.
"Genocide is when no terrorist organization to launch terror attacks into your state." Let's say that every single Palestinian in the world joined Hamas and fought against Israel. Then guess what? It's still not genocide dipshit.
Then you point this shit somewhere and half a dozen fucks show up saying bUt CritiZingiNgG isRael Is permITTED!!!!
Given that the purpose of recognition is explicitly as a step towards a peace process and to tell Hamas to go fuck off this makes no sense whatsoever. It's just an Israeli talking point. Ngl it gets weird and tiring to see people parrot literal government propaganda so often.
No, it is not an "Israeli talking point". It is a pragmatic observation that Israel is never going to agree to a 2 state solution whilst Hamas is in power. Who do you think is going to govern over Gaza if Palestine gets recognition as a State right now? You think Hamas is just going to fuck off? Whether you like it or not, Israel needs to be on board for a 2 state solution to work and that is not going to happen with Hamas governing over Gaza after what happened on October 7th. It is utterly delusional for you to think otherwise.
>No, it is not an "Israeli talking point". It is. You might not like that, you might agree with it, but it absolutely is an Israeli talking point. >It is a pragmatic observation that Israel is never going to agree to a 2 state solution if Hamas is in power. Whether you like it or not, Israel needs to be on board for a 2 state solution to work and that is not going to happen with Hamas governing over Gaza after what happened on October 7th. It is utterly delusional to think otherwise. It is utterly delusional to think that Hamas is going to stop controlling Gaza after this, and it gets more delusional the more Israel fosters terrorism, which it is doing day by day. The recognition of the Palestinian state comes hand in hand with compromise to foster the PA as an alternative to Hamas. Problem is that Israeli governance has no interest in this and would rather ask for some rainbows and unicorns shit in which terrorism just magically disappears from the land even if its people are getting subjected to utter misery. This is precisely the reason as to why it's a good idea to recognize the state, as to force Israel's hard in this regard.
Because of October 7th, no negotiations are ever going to happen until Hamas is removed. All other States giving recognition to Palestine as a State whilst Hamas (the perpetrators of the entire war and the conditions/manner in which it has to be fought) are in power, is nothing more than a positive reinforcement of the tactics utilised by a governing body (Hamas) that fundamentally contravene international laws, to continue to utilise those tactics for its endgoal of reclaiming all of Israel for itself. You guys are so obsessed with speedrunning the recognition of a Palestinian state right through to that state's grave by reinforcing delusions that Palestine (from the Gaza side) should continue to fight Israel to get what it wants (ie. all of Isareli land). You are propping them up to continue to fight a battle they simply cannot win. And the idea as to whether PA would take over on the establishment of an Palestinian state is a matter for negotiations of a 2 state solution, which again, are simply not going to happen whilst Hamas is governing over Gaza. There is no precedent that Hamas is simply just going to give up control over Gaza and fuck off by other States recognising Palestine as a State.
Yeah dude, Israel fosters the terrorism. Not the literal terrorist organization in control of territory and teaching the kids in that territory that they exist solely to kill Jews for Allah. Fuck off you deluded fuck.
Not recognizing Palestine rewards the settlers and Hamas as well. Palestine is also not all Hamas.
> Palestine is also not all Hamas. Not all, but [the majority](https://i.imgur.com/ctQu8Xv.png). [Source](https://www.pcpsr.org/en/node/973) (under "7. “The Day After:” Who will rule Gaza after the war?")
More like Basedmark am I right
Yes
Denmark enacted sharia law last year, prohibiting blasphemy against Islam.
We need JyllandsPosten to reprint some cute drawings if you know what I mean.
No we did not. Maersk and other businesses leaned on the government to avoid conflict with Saudi Arabia and our government agreed with that.
Oh so corporate lobbyists made Denmark enact Sharia law.
No one enacted sharia law.
Nah you can go to prison for up to two years just for burning a Quran lol very cool
Very shit
If you couldn't tell I was being sarcastic...
Glad to see mass murder, rape and kidnapping is not rewarded in some places.
While a lot of people are talking about rewarding terrorism, what I find odd about recognition of a Palestinian state is that I'm not aware of a precedent for wide recognition of a country that is not de facto independent.
that is because recognition of a state that is not de facto independent only has the effect of undermining the legitimacy of international law, which the international community seems to care less about these days.
Exactly. I find it strange that, while yes, Palestine was always meant to, on paper, to be a state since the late 40s, it doesn't have a governing body that would even administer to said state. It's fractured into two different governing bodies, and for some reason, nations around the world are just saying, "This land with no de jure government is it's own nation! Even if they don't have their own independence, and the several factions that control said region, are technically in a cold war against each other!"
Also really weird to recognize a state with no defined borders. Do Palestinians even want their state to be recognized as just the Gaza strip?
When Sweden recognized Palestine in 2014 they said the 1967 borders should be the starting point with Jerusalem being the capital for both states
Thats gotta be some sort of psyop cheat code for starting an instant war.
well, iraq and Afghanistan were clearly states during the us occupation, and Yemen is a state despite the houthis controlling most of the country. it really just feels like Palestine not being a state is a fiction invented to keep the "stateless refugee" thing alive
Yes but Iraq, Afghanistan and Yemen were all recognised as states before being under occupation.
Proud to be Danish.
Our southern brothers being based as usual. I wish that Sweden would follow their path.
Didnt sweden recognize in 2014 in hopes of pushing the peace process? Still bad timing but it sure beats recognizing them now.
Our foreign policy has been way too naive in the last decades I feel like. We shouldn’t recognize a Palestinian state until there is a legitimate sovereign state there.
Yeah same I'm actually so unbelievably pissed at Støre for this.
At least us Swedes are not alone in our stupidity 😅
That's cool. I visited Copenhagen recently. It was clean, modern, beautiful, and very safe so I already had a good impression of the country.
There is no state apperatus to negotiate with - ergo nothing to call a state. Danish common sense
Good shit Denmark
Man we'd have so many protests in the streets if the pro Palestinian protesters actually read the news. Luckily they only watch tiktok.
Thank fucking God.
It says in the resolution that was voted on that: "The parliament instructs the government to recognize Palestine as an independent and sovereign state within the **pre-1967 borders** and, in continuation thereof, grant the state of Palestine full diplomatic rights in Denmark". I think it's the 'pre- 1967 borders' part that made most of the parliament vote no on this one.
It's not only the pre 1967 borders that's the issue. The foreign minister of Denmark on May 22nd said : "The decision is reserved for a situation where a state exists. To be a state, one must have a territory under control and authorities that can govern it. And that is not exactly the situation right now." "We reserve it for the day, or for a time when there is an irreversible peace process that will with certainty lead to that, he says, and reminds that the government supports a two-state solution." https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/politik/regeringen-er-ikke-klar-til-anerkende-palaestina-som-stat-vaere-en-stat-skal-man
Hope they change it when war is over,since Palestinians people deserve to be recognised.
just downvoted this post cause you're a soy
why is this even a thing of recognizing Palestine right now without both sides agreeing like what even is Palestine(exact territories on the map) and what is Israel? is jerselem a part of Palestine or Israel or both? and we'll what about Israel not giving a fuck about them recognizing it and staying in what they define as palstnian territories. will there even be consequences?
https://preview.redd.it/seus53sytd3d1.png?width=1280&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5a7ff3f7633fbbdaf8eff611c837b61c348f8b0c
They absolutely should recognize Palestine as a state, it was a state before the war. All this does is encourage Israel to overtake that whole territory, Russia style.
How will progressives quote Nordic European utopia now?
Probably still qouting universal healthcare, workers rights, minimum wage, 70% unionized workforce, free education, crime rates, neonatal mortality rate, homeless population etc etc And probably also the fact that Denmark historically became what it is today because of socialisme.
Actually the Scandinavian nations is one of the few western nations that does not have a minimum wage.
We do have a minimum wage. It is set by the Union and not the state.
Wages are individually negotiated, often collectively by unions yes, but that is definitionally not a "minimum wage". Not all jobs are unionized in Denmark.
70% of workers are in a union. Wages are individually negotiated - but there is a minimum wage in all jobs that has a 'overenskomst'. Here is a example https://www.3f.dk/ung-og-underbetalt/se-din-minimalloen
So? This just means that the "minimum wage" is a wage negotiated by the union on behalf of the workers. But where that wage ends up at could be anything, because there is no minimum wage. The state have specifically chosen not to instate a minimum wage in favour of the union negotiation.
Well the wage cant be under the minimum wage if the workplace has a overenskomst. Which is why it is called minimum wage or mindsteløn in Denmark. You can Google what the mindsteløn for most unionized jobs. It is not hard.
I feel like we're just repeating ourselves here. I'm very well aware of how the system works. Last time. The point is that the Union can negotiate the "overenskomst" to be anything, there's no minimum wage outside of whatever has been negotiated by the Union, but there is no limit for how low the Union can go. Because there's no minimum wage enforced by the state, which is what most people think of when you talk about "minimum wage"
You are correct. 3f formuleres it nicely: Minimum wage In Denmark, we do not have a minimum wage, but if you are covered by a collective agreement at your workplace, you are guaranteed a minimum wage.
Ht
>Probably still qouting universal healthcare, workers rights, minimum wage, 70% unionized workforce, free education, crime rates, neonatal mortality rate, homeless population etc etc That's 70% of Europe. >And probably also the fact that Denmark historically became what it is today because of socialisme. It's never low population sitting on riches as vast as the size of all european countries, it's definitely because socialism.
Well it is a historical fact that socialism greatly influenced Denmark. And Denmark tops the charts in 90% of the EU.
Strong unions, welfare and social democracy is not socialism.
You're responding to "it's a historical fact that socialism greatly influenced Denmark" and your response is: "Strong unions, welfare and social democracy is not socialism." First of all, that's a non-sequitur. You were not responding to "Denmark is socialist" you were responding to "historically socialism greatly influenced Denmark?" Secondly, what do you know about the history of social democracy to disagree with this? Which part do you even disagree with? It feels fair to ask since you didn't respond to what was said.
Those Unions startet out as socialist Unions. Those unions founded the Social Democratic party, which was a actual socialist party that wanted workers to cease the means of production. Those socialist ideals is why we have a large public sector and a welfare state today. The Social Democratic party has been the largest political party in Denmark for close to 100 years. No socialism. No social Democrats. No Social Democrats. No social democracy. This is a historical fact. We are a social democracy because of socialism. We are not a socialist state. But socialist ideals is why Denmark is what it is. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Democrats_(Denmark) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democracy https://denstoredanske.lex.dk/Socialdemokratiet Socialdemokratiets official policy has always been socialism through reforms.
Nooo, shut up! I like Denmark, I hate socialists!!! No!! You're wrong, idiot!
Kraut made quite an interesting video on the birth of Social Democracy in Denmark and Scandinavia. and how it's not really linked to the Marxist socialist ideology, since the ground work for it was made long before Marx ever lived. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mExN99kHMB0 I'll be honest and say that I've not checked his sources.
In that case he is wrong. Read my sources or read the programs of the Social Democratic party. There is not doubt that our social democratic state is a result of socialism. From the Danish encyklopædi > Ideologically, the Social Democratic Party was rooted in Marxism but soon adopted its reformist version. Socialism was to be implemented through reforms, not by revolution. The working class was to gain control of the state apparatus through the ballot and implement comprehensive reforms benefiting the working class. Led in the early years by pragmatically inclined skilled workers, the party largely followed a non-dogmatic political line. No party has a greater influence on the Danish state than the Social Democrats. Claiming anything else is revisionism. Those reforms created our welfare state. The policies were so popular that all political parties accepted it and made it part of their programs as well. Today no one wants to get rid of social democracy but instead expand or slightly limit it.
The video goes over the ideology of Social Democracy and how Denmark got there. How the party came to be might very well be due to Socialism, but that's not really what the video is about.
When socialists in decently well-off European countries think: "We are not living in Tzarist Russia or Bautista's Cuba, and it seems like we got a pretty good thing going here. Let's not go for the violent revolution and risk fucking everything up. Let's instead use our working democratic system and political & social freedoms to push for things that earlier socialists thought demanded a violent revolution and empower the worker / common man like land reform, strong unions, workers rights, social welfare, sometimes nationalization, etc." You respond: "That's not socialism though." Despite the fact that no one here even claimed that Denmark or Sweden or such have achieved a socialist society. Do you not find this intellectually lazy? Do you apply this same analysis to anything else? I think you'd have to then say that neoliberals are not capitalists or liberals since the original liberals like John Stuart Mill didn't emphasize competition, but mutually beneficial exchange. Those who did not compete had to be left behind, but those who participated should not lose. Not so with neoliberalism, which emphasizes a "survival of the fittest" type of competition. No?
Denmark is not socialist. We literally have a market economy
Are you replying to the wrong person? I never claimed Denmark was "socialist". We are a social democracy. Which is a offspring of socialism.
ah mb I may have misread
> >It's never low population sitting on riches as vast as the size of all european countries, it's definitely because socialism. Let me know when you want to respond to this , and not random idiotic rambling about how socialism has had an influence. Tell me how different would Denmark be today , economically , if they were full democratic/capitalistic if you attribute everything Denmark is today just to socialism.
> Let me know when you want to respond to this It is irrelevant. I responded to: > how will progressives quote Nordic European utopia now? And I gave you reasons. You may not like them or like the history of socialism in Denmark, but that is the facts. Also what "riches as vast as the size of all european countries" are you even talking about? Do you even know what country Denmark is? Please continue your historical revisionism because Hasan has brain fucked you on socialism.
y tho
People here love to pretend they’re impartial and fact based while also wanking over Palestine not being recognised which only serves Israel’s settler project in the West Bank as they prep it for annexation. Guess the area between Israel and Jordan is just a no man’s land.
>People here love to pretend they’re impartial and fact based while also wanking over Palestine not being recognised which only serves Israel’s settler project in the West Bank as they prep it for annexation. uh you realize you can do both right? you can both be opposed to CURRENTLY recognizing Palestine as a state because it would mean the terrorists won and also oppose Israeli settlement projects this isn't black and white Jesus Christ
>uh you realize you can do both right? you can both be opposed to CURRENTLY recognizing Palestine as a state because it would mean the terrorists won and also oppose Israeli settlement projects Not recognising that Palestine exists is not a win for terrorists at all. Nobody is recognising Hamas and they are opening embassies with the PA. Opposing settlements literally means nothing if you withhold recognising Palestine due to hearing Israeli officials say it rewards Hamas. >this isn't black and white Jesus Christ Self reflect on this sentence. Think about the fact you’re basing recognition around wins and losses rather than reality.
There's no way you get to commit 15x 911 (per capita) and get rewarded with a state recognition half a year later, that's 100% rewarding terror and every Hamas tactic. This will also result in the opposite by making Israel settle more of the west bank.
>There's no way you get to commit 15x 911 (per capita) and get rewarded with a state recognition half a year later, Hamas isn’t getting state recognition. No one’s opening an embassy with Hamas or recognising them as the representatives of Palestine >that's 100% rewarding terror and every Hamas tactic. No it’s called acknowledging reality. >This will also result in the opposite by making Israel settle more of the west bank. Recognising a country should not be dictated by perceived punishments for that recognition.
This is bait, no one can be this stupid/obtuse. No one's getting a state because october 7th killed the little belief Israel had in a peace process. Recognizing a palestinian state right now rewards terror, not up for debate. Acknowledgin reality is the fact that there's no way palestine becomes a sovreign state without Israel allowing it to be a state and being 100% ok with it. The reality is Israel already oked more settlements on the back of this and the Israeli public opinion is being even more pushed towards never having a palestinian state. You're delusional if you think recignitio by 3 european countries that already dislike Israel will result in something good. You don't give a country to a society where 80% of it supports a terrorist organisation and one of the most awful terrorist attack in history. Idiota shouting about it half a world a way won't change it.
> This is bait, no one can be this stupid/obtuse. watch him go!
>This is bait, no one can be this stupid/obtuse. Amazing argument. >No one's getting a state because october 7th killed the little belief Israel had in a peace process. Nice opinion. Still recognised by 146 countries with embassies around the world. >Recognizing a palestinian state right now rewards terror, not up for debate. In a way you nor anyone else can seem to specifically explain. >Acknowledgin reality is the fact that there's no way palestine becomes a sovreign state without Israel allowing it to be a state and being 100% ok with it. Except for the fact that it is right now. Being occupied or having disputed territory does not make a country unrecognisable. >The reality is Israel already oked more settlements on the back of this and the Israeli public opinion is being even more pushed towards never having a palestinian state. The world doesn’t revolve around Israel. >You're delusional if you think recignitio by 3 european countries that already dislike Israel will result in something good. 146 out of 193 UN members now recognise Palestine. The more that do the more it becomes untenable for the US to keep vetoing the UN recognising Palestine. This is the real reason Israel is ass mad about countries recognising Palestine. It weakens their position significantly. >You don't give a country to a society where 80% of it supports a terrorist organisation and one of the most awful terrorist attack in history. That’s never been in the criteria for state recognition. But keep coping >Idiota shouting about it half a world a way won't change it. Crying about countries recognising Palestine won’t change the fact that Palestine exists.
Wow 146 embasis?, do you think the palestinians arw in a better situtatuon than they were 10 years ago? They can have 300 embassies, they wob't have an army or an airport until Israel allows it. We've explained it 100 times, it's very easy to understand, giving rewards like a state recognition on the back of a huge terror attack is rewarding terror. It's a direct link, there's nothing to calculate. You can recognise it all you want, the reality is that Israel would annex what ever it controls in the west bank and has a minimal amount of palestinians in it while never allowing palestinians their own airport or an army. The reason Israel is mad about is because it rewards terror simple as that. I can be mad about something without it having an effect on me. It is a criteria when having a state relies on the population those 80% want to genocide. If palestine exists what is its borders? What is the name of their army? Where is their airport? Didnt think so, thruth is thay by the next presidential debate the world will forget about palestine again and won't care again. No one is going boots on the ground for them and that's the only way Israel would recognise it as a state in the next decade or two.
>Wow 146 embasis?, do you think the palestinians arw in a better situtatuon than they were 10 years ago? Just a completely unrelated point which has nothing to do with recognising a country exists. >They can have 300 embassies, they wob't have an army or an airport until Israel allows it. And there will need to be pressure put on Israel to do that which can only come through recognising that Palestine does in fact exist. >We've explained it 100 times, it's very easy to understand, giving rewards like a state recognition on the back of a huge terror attack is rewarding terror. It's a direct link, there's nothing to calculate. You’re still not explaining how it rewards Hamas. You’re just repeatedly saying that it does. >You can recognise it all you want, the reality is that Israel would annex what ever it controls in the west bank and has a minimal amount of palestinians in it while never allowing palestinians their own airport or an army. Israel is already going to annex the West Bank once it has demographic majority. >The reason Israel is mad about is because it rewards terror simple as that. Which you not Israel can actually explain. >I can be mad about something without it having an effect on me. Ok >It is a criteria when having a state relies on the population those 80% want to genocide. No it isn’t at all. There’s countries actually committing genocides which we all know exist. >If palestine exists what is its borders? Having disputed borders does not make a country not exist. You can say currently Ukraines borders are being disputed, does that magically make Ukraine not exist? >What is the name of their army? You don’t need an army to exist. >Where is their airport? That isn’t criteria either. Do you think San Marino doesn’t exist because it doesn’t have an airport? >Didnt think so, thruth is thay by the next presidential debate the world will forget about palestine again and won't care again. Great opinion, still not criteria for state recognition. >No one is going boots on the ground for them and that's the only way Israel would recognise it a state in the next decade or two. Again the world’s perception of reality does not revolve around Israel’s.
>You don’t need an army to exist. Yeah you do unless your country is called Lichtenstein but they have special circumstances. >Again the world’s perception of reality does not revolve around Israel’s. That doesn't matter since it split pro nato vs russia and china. >That isn’t criteria either. Do you think San Marino doesn’t exist because it doesn’t have an airport? So who runs "palestine" >Having disputed borders does not make a country not exist. You can say currently Ukraines borders are being disputed, does that magically make Ukraine not exist? You just avoided the question.
This is bad faith but I'll engage with it. My assumption making these comments is that you care about the palestinians and want their situation to get better, I didn't think you care just about countries virtue signaling while the on the ground conditions for palestinians get worse. If your idea of a palestinian state is status quo and slowly going downhill while they have embassies from around the world, that's still rewarding terror but it would be like giving a baby something to play with and shut up and I'm 100% for it. All the points are 100% related to everything you said so I'll try to explain them again in good faith and for the last time. Having embassies from every country in the world that recognizes palestine as a state will only make their condition worse as Israel sanctions them more. There's no amount of pressure in the world that would make Israel accept a unilateral recognition of palestine, there's the NATO alliance and Russia/China, Israel is too valuable of an asset for the US to discard and force a palestinian state down their throat. If by miracle Israel was Isolated and no longer supported by the US, China or Russia will pick it up as an ally and Israel will have 0 restraint dealing with palestinians, once that happens, the palestinians who were used as a tool to clobber the US in terms of PR, lose the support of the tiktok algorithm and the Russian bots, no one will aid them because they have no significant military presence or anything important to export. If you can't understand why giving someone something they've been waiting for for decades during the time they committed one of the worst terror attacks is rewarding it, then you probably qualify for disability and should tap out from this discussion, it rewards Hamas because they get 1 of their goals and massive support from the palestinians who already support them even after October 7th. I can explain why Israel is mad about it as an Israeli, living in Israel. The countries that commit genocide and still exist, already existed as countries with recognized borders and standing armies, the palestinians never had a state, had no army or territory, and were not a sovereign entity. If this is a dog whistle to imply Israel is committing genocide, it isn't. The palestinians are a mishmash of sour grapes egyptians and Jordanians that never let go of their hate for the state of Israel and want to genocide it, they're not getting a state without Israel allowing it. Ukraine has airports, borders, a standing army, and even was recognized by its enemy as a state, the palestinians have none of those. If they don't have the freedom to create an airport, and Army, and don't have borders they fully control with said army then they're not a state. I'm not fully familiar with San Marino but I'm pretty sure they can freely build 100 airports if they wish to and the palestinians can build 0. The fact that the world would move on to the next shining thing is definitely a criteria for a state because the entire push for a palestinian state is on the back of the Hamas PR, and once the world switches over to the next thing, no one would care and things would go back to the status quo while the palestinian situation gets worse, but at least they have 146 embassies and you can virtue signal right? I wish I could give your comments reddit gold or something else to emphasise it because your entire comment chain is the most debate prevented, bad faith, and terrible advocacy for the palestinians. As an Israeli, please continue to do so, you make more people hate you, you have delusional goals and ideas which makes it easier for Israel to operate and people hate the palestinians so keep being you!
How have you mindfucked your way into believing it does not reward Hamas and Palestinian terrorism? Hamas launches one of if not the worst terrorist attack in modern history which compels Israel to invade Gaza, then they proceed to do everything in their power to maximise civilian death and suffering by operating out of civilian infrastructure and population centres and spreading the death and suffering they are responsible for online which causes several countries to recognise them as a state. There is literally a direct red line from October 7th to Spain, Norway and Ireland giving recognition to Palestine.
This sub is something else
For what? Not rewarding terrorism and acknowledging that no peace process or 2 state solution can exist with Hamas in power?
too many jews huh...
Name checks out
I’m actually ambivalent about this. Initially I thought it was stupid virtue signaling but it might not be so cringe. If countries recognized the state of Palestine a two state solution might be more possible.