Israel says it will seize parts of southern Lebanon as ‘defensive buffer’

Oh, totally. But the tricky (or useful, depending on who you are) part of The Past is that sense of distance; how it becomes almost second-nature to wave a hand and insist that "Things were just like that back then," and chide Modern Wokeness for inspiring people to apply today's moral standards to yesterday's events. As a fan of history, this pisses me off like ten different ways, because it's primarily used as a thought-terminating cliche for people who have no interest in analyzing or grappling with their own privilege—I'm not white or American, but it seems like White Americans will do backflips to avoid chalking *any* of their success or comfort to their Whiteness, and how it may have caused them fewer problems in certain areas of life than if they were a visible minority. And there *is* something to be said about meeting a historical moment based on the standards of its era, but **most people are deeply ignorant about** ***the actual standards of a historical era!*** So what they're actually arguing for is the ability to remember the past as it has been packaged to them through their own upbringing and through pop culture. They will make any discussion of medieval stories a miserable experience by arguing for the near-absence of dark-skinned people, despite how demonstrably untrue that has always been. (Before the invention of "Race" as we know it today as a way to justify dehumanizing certain groups of people for profit during the global slave trade and colonial expansion era, you were more likely to be judged by your religion or citizenship status, not your skin colour.) They'll argue that America's Founding Fathers viewed it as a Christian Nation despite all of them *literally writing at length* that they DID NOT WANT IT TO BE A CHRISTIAN NATION, and at least one Founding Father straight up saying he was into other religions. My point here is this: **It's easy for Americans (and Canadians) to wave away the racism of their forebears by leaning on the fantasy of Things Being Different Back Then.** What makes Israel's genocide so alarming—and such a threat to all colonial powers today—is that it's happening right now, in 4K, with a brutality that cannot be explained away by culture or era. A year or two ago, I couldn't go on social media without just seeing a mangled corpse of a Palestinian child, and suddenly that made the "Mideast Conflict" incredibly visceral and easy to oppose for the average person. Israel's entire colonial project is only kept alive via American support. If an American leader were to simply and plainly hold them to the same standards of any other country, it would stop. The settler projects would stop. The unending bullets and bombs thrown into bodies of neighbouring countries would dry up. We know this would happen because *it happened before*. Inexplicably, George H.W. Bush opposed Israel and cut off planned funding that they would use for settler camps; they backed off and agreed to follow international law (for a time). (There are also people who believe that this act cost Bush his best shot at winning a second term, which I don't disagree with, but I was a toddler at the time and can't really say.) Israel will never be more ferocious in its warfare and flagrant with its propaganda campaigns abroad, because the naked genocidal cruelty and inhumanity of its actions have never been so clear and widely-publicized. It's a genuine miracle that as much progress towards pressuring politicians around the world to divest from Israel has been made, but that's why Bibi is tripling down; he's taking the West Bank, he's taking Lebanon, he's hoping to destabilize Iran to a point where it will collapse under its own weight within the coming years. The walls are closing in, the popular sentiment is changing, and I genuinely believe he'd rather die than stop and risk being held accountable for his *many* crimes.

Man, blood meridian just showed how absolutely gruesome and devilish that whole time and place was. Apparently it's very accurate portrayal of what that time and place was like. You could confidently say it goes back to English empirical methods and attitudes, before that it was roman.

The new Syrian government has been publically committing to the existing ceasefire and further normalisation since the day they took control. It didn't stop Israel bombing them and even though the attempts continued it didn't stop them backing a separatist drug lord and bombing government forces that were sent to stop sectarian fighting.

Lebensraum which translates to "living space". It was the Nazi's excuse for annexation and invasion. They just totes needed some breathing room

I believe they're referring to "lebensraum" which translates to "living room".

As awful as Germany tends to be with regard to Israel, they don't recognize Israel's illegal claims of annexation over East Jerusalem nor the Golan Heights, so there's no reason to imagine they would regarding Lebanese territory either.

I have a feeling if Germany does this it will create a lot of discord in Europe, more specifically EU countries. Poland's disdain will increase, a lot of people will say they are sold out to US and Israel etc, feeding right wing anti EU rhetoric.

Or Kneecap.

[removed]

I believe in southern Lebanon's right to exist. Why doesn't Israel believe in that? Shame on it for being anti-entire-world-except-itself.

No country has a right to exist, they.. exist, the people within them should be allowed to exist in peace without some other country attacking them because they believe in a different interpretation of the same floaty sky man

Jews have the right to exist in Israel. I do not believe that they have the right to run an apartheid state. That would probably mean a secular democracy where everyone's rights are respected. Then again I am an American so I don't know what a functional secular democracy where everyone's rights are respected looks like. EDIT: To be painfully specific. When I say "in Israel" I mean the physical place that they call Israel. The current government ruling that place is illegitimate and does not "have the right to exist" and more than the apartheid state in south africa had the right to exist. Jewish holy sites are there though and they absolutely should have access to them. That doesn't give anyone the right to do what Israel does. Two separate issues.

I made a similarly misunderstood comment elsewhere that people jumped on me for. Which is actually heartening, because I agree with criticizing how Israel uses claims of antisemitism and their “existential threats” to create smoke for their crimes against humanity. Need to remember the /s sometimes.

Wait a minute. Doesn't Lebanon have a right to exist? Or only Israel has a right to invade a sovereign nation, displace its people, and steal the land? And America has to help them do it? I'm so confused...

Do you believe in Lebanon's sovereignty and right to exist? How about for Palenstine?

> Do not move an ancient boundary stone set up by your ancestors. -Proverbs 22 verse 28

No, just some 'settlers' are going to tie you up and parade you around town while a bulldozer flattens your property.

Only if you’re foolish enough to go out and get groceries and leave it unattended

Unfortunately the third amendment doesn’t included them so yes they will be

Not half. The whole house and everything around you

What’s publicly disclosed will be very different to bribes and leverage privately given.  There will be plenty of other Epstein’s in the world on Mossad’s payroll - he was just the biggest fish that got caught. 

Let’s not pretend the democrats don’t give them everything they want as well