If "From The River To The Sea" is bad, what's this?

[RainWalker]

[WA-03 Democrat]

1. There is only one state of Israel and Palistine is in it

It would be like President Biden showing a map of the USA and the OP damning him for not showing Mississippi.

2 state solution offered and refused for over 70 years

Bibi far right but try to be factual with Geography 101

[RainWalker]

5. The map he's holding up doesn't show Palestine

It shows Israel as a single entity.
And that tracks given Netanyahu's remarks 2 months earlier.
[link:https://m.jpost.com/arab-israeli-conflict/article-748435|]

Palestinian hopes of establishing a sovereign state “must be eliminated,” Netanyahu told Knesset (Israeli parliament) committee members in a closed-door meeting about his government’s plans for the eventual departure of PA President Mahmoud Abbas.

[WA-03 Democrat]

10. Try to keep up

State of Palestine is in the country of Israel

[RainWalker]

11. Whoosh

[claudette]

29. Not

really.

[Violet_Crumble]

19. Palestine is not a part of Israel

Palestine is made up of the West Bank and Gaza and it's occupied territory.
Palestinians aren't citizens of Israel.
Mississippi is part of the United States.and the laws of the US apply to everyone in Mississippi regardless of race or religion.

So. No. The West Bank and Gaza being shown as part of Gaza is typical extreme right wing types, and it's not much different than the extremists who insist that Israel shouldn't exist and it should all be a Palestinian state.

[Darwins_Retriever]

32. Actually there are some Palestinians and Arabs

that are Israeli citizens. But I do acknowledge at times like this they have to keep a low profile. The Arab countries do not like Palestinians except when situations like now, then the "support" them. But they don't want them to move in.

[Voltaire2]

2. Don't expect honest answers.

[RainWalker]

6. Right?

[CincyDem]

3. I call it a map of countries Israel with whom Israel has negotiated peace treaties.

Which was the point being made during the speech and was shared in contrast to the same map from 1947 which had no green.

His New Middle East, when read in the context of the speech, is a statement of what is today. All of the international borders shown on the map are what is today.

It is consistent with the current Israeli borders and the current government’s position. Future governments and future maps…who knows. Depends on both sides.

From the river to the sea is the terrorist battle cry for the elimination of Israel and extermination of Jews.

To say this map, at this scale, is the equivalent toward Palestinians is as crazy as saying Israel wants to eliminate Cairo…an area and population 10x Gaza…simply because it’s not on this map.

No question Bibi wants an unattainable one state solution. Unfortunately so does Hamas. The difference between the two is what they are willing to compromise to get there and, unfortunately one side has been and still is being asked to compromise its existence to get there.

Change that and the whole landscape changes, as it could have in 2020.

[RainWalker]

4. The map he's holding up doesn't show Palestine

And only shows Israel as a single state.
I don't believe "From the river to the sea" is bad either, and I see it as a cry for freedom and liberation.

Here's the video of Netanyahu at the UN showing that map of Israel as a single state.

[CincyDem]

7. Well...once you believe something, it becomes the lens through which all other information is filtered.

And that true for everyone, including me. Appreciate the video and it only reinforces my view of the speech.

In ‘48, peace treaties in the region looked like this. In ‘23, they look like this. Compare and contrast. That’s the speech.

But that’s cool…you go with the “cry for freedom and liberation” interpretation. I’ll go with the “let’s cross the border and kill, rape, kidnap as many as we can” interpretation. I think one has much more actual supportive data but hey…maybe that’s just my lens.

[claudette]

30. Maybe

he’s showing the biblical map since he and all right wing Zionists believe God gave the Chosen people that land because it’s in their bible. Not sure if Jesus, himself a Jew, would agree with what’s going on today regarding that land.

But the secular world has a very different view of how land is settled. England gave Israel to Jewish refugees from Hitler’s war. They, in turn, took land from Palestine by waging a war. So here we are hoping for establishing a two state solution when the leader of Israel has no intention of doing so.

[Violet_Crumble]

20. That's not correct....

His New Middle East, when read in the context of the speech, is a statement of what is today. All of the international borders shown on the map are what is today.

Oh, so now we have international borders drawn on what Bibi says?

The map below clearly shows both the West Bank and Gaza as being distinct from Israel. They call it 'armistice lines' but they're the internationally recognised borders after the 1967 war.

If you disagree with this, then why aren't the millions of Palestinians in both the West Bank and Gaza Israeli citizens and given the rights and protections that citizenship would afford them?



Very, very few countries apart from Israel view the West Bank and Gaza as part of Israeli. Pretty sure even the US doesn't see it like that. To display a map showing Israel as including the Occupied Territories is no shock for the absolutist Israeli govt, but they shouldn't go whining about it when maps appear that cut Israel out of the picture.

[AloeVera]

24. Maybe I misunderstood.

It is consistent with the current Israeli borders and the current government’s position.

It may be consistent with the current government's position, but are you sure it is consistent with Israel's internationally-recognized borders? I'm pretty sure that the whole of the international community, including the current U.S. Administration, considers the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem as Occupied Palestinian Territories and not part of Israel. Hence the outrage over this map shown at the UN.

Did I misinterpret what you said?

[Darwins_Retriever]

8. At the time of the partition, there was no Palestine

When the UN partitioned the area, three was no Palestine. Just the defeated Ottoman Empire. Part was given to establish Israel and the other half was for Jordan to administer, Well at least until Jordan joined the war in 69 and lost. Losing the West Bank.to Israel. Even prior to that, Jordan had granted citizenship to Palestinians, just to turn around and strip them of citizenship. You see, Jordan didn't accept the West Bank as part of Palestine. If by magic, Israel disappears there still won't be a Palestine. Israel's neighbors would claim the land. If I was Israel, I'd give the West Bank back to Jordan, or better yet, the UN as an international territory that would house the UN HQ and main UN agencies and WHO, World Bank, ICC ,,, OHHHH and the Republican Party HQ, and NRA and ...

[Violet_Crumble]

21. So what? Are you going to apply that logic to everything else?

I can kick this one off:

At the time when the First Fleet arrived, there was no Australia. Just some Aboriginals living their best life, hanging out, subsistence farming, but not owning any land. Clearly the British needed to step in and administer this hot mess. Now they're claiming that they're the original owners of this land. How can that be so when it wasn't called Australia? If Australia ceases to exist, will New Zealand arrive and take over? Because there's no way we can trust thosePalestinians Aboriginals to run things for themselves, right?

I dunno, how about the West Bank and Gaza be governed by Palestinians? Y'know, the people who actually live there?

[AloeVera]

25. Interesting.

I wonder then why it was called the Partition of Palestine?

One half was given to Israel and the other half to Jordan to administer? I've never heard the Partition described that way, can you provide a source please?

[claudette]

28. Except that

there always WAS a Palestine. It’s in the Bible

[stopdiggin]

9. 'from the river to the sea' IS bad

expressing clear terrorist and genocidal aims. There is absolutely no IF involved.

proceed ...
- - - - - - - -

[RainWalker]

12. Nah it's not

The crying out for freedom from an oppressed people is never bad.

[stopdiggin]

13. even when using terms explicitly calling for genicide ...

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

[RainWalker]

14. What term is calling for genocide?

[stopdiggin]

15. an overt and explicit call for the destruction

and elimination of the state of Israel. Full stop.

Please don't attempt to play word games with this. The meaning of the slogan is precisely laid out (and clearly understood) in the phrase itself.

[RainWalker]

16. Nah it isn't

There's nothing remotely close to that.
When Native Americans speak of "land back" are they calling for the destruction of America? A cry for freedom is not a cry for committing mass genocide. Palestinian people aren't free and they deserve to be. What a world we live in where a certain group of people who are oppressed and crying out for freedom and liberty is seen as wanting to commit mass genocide. It's completely upside down and illogical.

[stopdiggin]

17. 'river to the sea', my friend

spelled out in explicit territorial boundaries ... There is no mistaking meaning - or intent.

[RainWalker]

18. It's about humanity

Are you aware that Israel doesn't even allow the Palestinian people water rights? Israel completely controls their water supply.

I leave you with a quote from the great Nelson Mandela;

"We know too well that our freedom is incomplete without the freedom of the Palestinians."

[AloeVera]

22. Big dreams.

In a master/slave-type relationship, the slaves have to dream big. It's all they got.

[AloeVera]

23. Is there genocidal intent in THIS?

From the Founding Charter of Likud, 1977:

The Right of the Jewish People to the Land of Israel (Eretz Israel)
a. The right of the Jewish people to the land of Israel is eternal and indisputable and is linked with the right to security and peace; therefore, Judea and Samaria will not be handed to any foreign administration; between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.

[Silent Type]

26. When will leaders learn to leave the Sharpies in the office? Always lead to controversy.

[claudette]

27. That's

something a lot of folks already figured out.

[LymphocyteLover]

31. this is a dumb meme. I'm no fan of Netanyahu but an out of context map that emphasizes some neighboring countries

means nothing