Degenerate Faggots Starting Civil War2.0

[BjornP]

If the leftist Zionists did not support the revolt against the British, then how did Ben-Gurion become PM? Didn't the Jewish settlers at time support declaring independance? Are you saying the proto-Israeli right was a dominant minority leading the fight against the British despite Labour Zionists not wanting them to, yet the right still lost the first elections to the likes of Ben-Gurion..?

That sounds.. odd. Or maybe I'm too tired for it make sense. I'll look it up in my history encyclopedia tomorrow. Have a good... whatever time it is in Canada now.

[Smitty-48]

Well, again, the Zionist Left has been complicit all along, in a clearly Right Wing Zionist agenda, the Zionist Left claimed to be Internationalist Leftists, but notice that what they participated in, was a radically Right Wing Nationalist series of wars of conquest and ethnic cleansing, the Zionist Left, clearly abandoned their stated principles, creating not a Socialist Paradise, but rather a Jewish Nazi enclave, Israel was not acquired by Internationalist Leftism, Israel was quite obviously acquired, by inherently Right Wing Nationalist Blitzkreig.

All modern Fascism starts off on the Left, Mussolini was a Socialist, Hitler joined the German Workers Party, the Israeli Labour Movement was supposedly pluralistic, who knew?

[Okeefenokee]

The Jews 'took' Israel, if you want to put it that way, after half a century of being defended, and supported by bigger stronger entities. I just put an asterisk on it. They didn't storm the beaches of Gaza against an entrenched Arab army.

[Smitty-48]

The Jews 'took' Israel, if you want to put it that way, after half a century of being defended, and supported by bigger stronger entities. I just put an asterisk on it. They didn't storm the beaches of Gaza against an entrenched Arab army.

They Jews who took Israel weren't protected, because the Jews who took Israel, were not from Palestine, the Jews who took Israel, came from Europe in the wake of the Second World War, and almost immediately upon arrival, went to war against the British.

Once they had stormed the beaches of British Palestine, in the Jewish Operation Overlord of the Exodus, forcing the British to flee in the face of assymetrical warfare, the Arabs responded by launching into an all out war to drive the Jewish Operation Overlord back into the sea, which is all part and parcel of the Israeli War of Independance.

Saying that the British "gave" Israel to the Zionists, would mean that the British "gave" the United States of America to the American Revolutionaries, but that obviously is not how Americans tell the tale, except you apparently all of a sudden.

[TheReal_ND]

The Jews who settled Palestine under the Balfour agreement were most certainly protected. Until they couldn't get what they wanted anymore. This predates WWII. It pisses me off when people use the holocoaster to justify Israel. Barely had a thing to do with it.

[Smitty-48]

The Jews who settled Palestine under the Balfour agreement were most certainly protected. Until they couldn't get what they wanted anymore. This predates WWII. It pisses me off when people use the holocoaster to justify Israel. Barely had a thing to do with it.

The American colonists who settled in the 13 Colonies were most certainly protected as well, until they couldn't get what they wanted anymore, but no American would ever say that Britain "gave" the United States of America to the Revolutionaries, except Okee all of a sudden.

As with the American War of Independence, the Israeli War of Independence, was a Revolutionary War, against the British, bearing in mind, that the Arabs who attacked the Israelis in the wake of the British being driven out; also the British Empire.

The fact of the matter is, the British were not protecting the Zionists, the British were protecting their Arab proxies from the Zionist Exodus from Europe to Palestine, just as much as the British were protecting their First Nations proxies from the American Colonists, in the Ohio Valley in the 1770's.

[TheReal_ND]

This seems more correct.

[Okeefenokee]

I'm not saying there wasn't fighting, but there was a half century of prepping for that fight. All while that prepping was taking place, the Arabs were powerless to stop it, whereas, had the British not been there, the Zionists would have probably been driven out sometime in the 20's or 30's. Meaning European Jews would have had very little chance of getting in in the first place, once they'd gotten to, "never again."

It would be like the allies getting to spend fifty years on the Normandy coast getting ready for the invasion, and the Germans not being able to stop them.

[Okeefenokee]

This seems more correct.

Except the part about the Zionists' intent from the start being the overthrow of the Arabs and the creation of a Jewish state. They were there for fifty years getting ready for it. It was their goal from the start, and they didn't even hide that fact.

The US colonists didn't show up on day one in the Americas, and start going on about how they were gonna throw off the rule of the King. The people funding the colonial adventures in England weren't working in the British government and openly campaigning for the removal of Monarchical rule of the King's colonies.

These aren't the same thing.

[TheReal_ND]

This also seems correct.