They didn't win a majority. They only got around 32%, if I remember correctly. Hitler became chancellor of a coalition government and then seized total power after Reichspräsident Hindenburg died.
Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
They didn't win a majority. They only got around 32%, if I remember correctly. Hitler became chancellor of a coalition government and then seized total power after Reichspräsident Hindenburg died.
They won but actually never got the majority in the Parliament.
About 44% of the votes in 1933, where the last democratic elections in the Weimar Republic were held, if my memory serves me right. It also has to be seen in a broader context where the Great Depression in 1929 added to the war reparations absolutely wrecked the german economy and by extension the Weimar Republic which was already walking on thin ice. Also the general anti-semitic public opinion prevalent in Europe at the time somehow made Hitler's very clear views on the Jews not that outlandish. Until 1928 the Nazis were still marginal (3% of the votes, I think) even if they were gaining traction.
I know, and I'm really thankful to you and the mods to keep it open, it must certainly not be easy. This is one of the safe havens on the internet where people can engage and express their opinions in a civil way. The rest is an absolute cesspit.
We just have a couple of posters who are really going overboard with this and maybe should be warned. Like the one whom I replied to said, the most interesting posters are just put off.
Not really good enough. What makes you think that the Palestines dying right now support terrorists? Also what is your definition of terrorist? Would you include the right wing Israeli mobs attacking people in the West Bank as terrorists too?
They also are aggressively replied to by some, to be fair.
I have found your posts to be really provocative (the poll argument is downright bizarre!) but reading your reason for them makes me just sad. Are you willing to be educated on the subject or have you decided that you will double down no matter what? Because what you are now doing is finding every angle that you can twist to fit your over-arching world view (context doesn't seem to matter) and ignore everything that, easily I might add, counters that.
Ok, so you experienced being incorrectly blamed for something you had nothing to do with, and had zero control of, and the lesson you learned from it is that you should also do the same. That's a strange one.
Do you have a link to the poll you cited?
The israel-palestine situation precedes Hitler by more than a decade.
So for example:
“The fact came out repeatedly in the Commission’s conference with Jewish representatives, that the Zionists looked forward to a practically complete dispossession of the present non-Jewish inhabitants of Palestine, by various forms of purchase”
That's from the King-Crane report circa 1922.
So now I ask you by your own definition are all Israelis "really that innocent?"
Ok and thank you for this. Maybe I phrased the question wrongly or maybe I should have not asked it at all.
There was a post about the West Bank. And having read it, it just occurred to me to ask if what was happening there different to similar events of the past. And recent history I might add - Crimea.
And regarding the suffering of the Palestinian people, it was most certainly not dismissive. That would be completely wrong. But they did elect Hamas.
Nevertheless, it is not wrong to say that what has happened since the attacks by Hamas, especially the scale is relatively and I stress relatively rare, given the background of the Middle East conflicts.
I may be wrong but that was my understanding.
That's fecking ominous.
So in your view, you can only ask a question if you are impartial. Ridiculous.
I personally am for removing any tweet that doesn't come from a credible source. And ban the offender if they keep on doing it.
The trust me bro tweets, like the whackjob explaining why it was an israeli rocket that hit the hospital, need to disappear (we'll probably never know what really happened, although I think that for once the IDF wasn't behind it). Also those showing acts of extreme violence, like a kid or a woman being shot. The latter are just obscene, unhealthy, fuel the rage and don't help in any way the discussion.
The effect of social media and how the media in the west can shape the average (in some cases below average as it seems in this thread) thinker's thoughts with selective journalism.
Add that to the casual racism (from a minority) against arabs and muslims in general and you're good to go.
For example:
Israel bombed a JOURNALIST team in Lebanon a week ago. The entire goddamn team had "PRESS" written on their shields.
A friend of a friend (JOURNALIST at Reuters) was blown into 2, head and torso in one part and legs in another).
Another female journalist has lost 1 leg and is set to lose the other.
How was the news greeted? "Oh a young journalist has lost his life, shame. Anyway, getting to the topic at hand...".
I was legit in the middle of tagging you to post the King-Crane report quote in response to that post you’re replying to there when I saw you’d replied to it.
It’s crazy how folks just seem to overlook everything that happened between WW1 and 1948
Is that what I said?
Let me be very clear then: you are pro-Israel (that's your choice) and you have framed your questions and challenges in this thread in such a way (in my opinion) that riles other posters. Then you act like you were just asking out of curiosity and innocence.
You can defend Israel til the cows come home, as far as I'm concerned. I am always interested in hearing from different sides of an argument. But please don't portray yourself as an honest broker, you are far from it.
Have you considered the reason for many of your questions have been met with aggressiveness? That your real agenda shines through?
For example, you now posts "they did elect Hamas" without bothering to add any context. So, when did they elect Hamas again? If you cross that with the current demographic of the Gaza Strip, what do you get?
the settlers are jewish terrorists. thats how they should be referred, otherwise its just appeasement.
I'm surprised it hasn''t happened before with Al-Jazeera being state-owned by one their biggest critics in the region.
You think all Germans who died supported Hitler? I argued like you do before and was told the Germans who were against Hitler but didn't do anything against him were add guilty.
My opinion doesn't matter. In Germany and most Western countries Hamas are classified as a terrorist organisation. Even before the atrocities they committed on October 7th.
I don't support any extremists. If Hamas had target solely the Zionist settlers, it would still be a bad crime but I wouldn't say that their victim were totally innocent.
As far as posting tweets is concerned, from my point of view, it is sharing information. I don't see everything that goes on in social media, and the algorithm will tend to show me what it thinks I want to see. I welcome news from everywhere because I'm not there.
I never said that. And extremists on both sides are the reason this conflict drags on that long and unfortunately still will.
Had a feeling this was coming regarding the West Bank.
They want a solution (the only solution they know, not the moral one) to the entire Palestine issue in 1 go.
Oh well, they have the US and their puppets on their side, they can do anything they want.
aka "I was met with stupid/illogical arguments with people whose opinion I couldn't change so now I'm using the same stupid/illogical argument 50 years later"
to make it more realistic, they should ram those vans into hospitals, churches and mosques in London and wipeout small groups of people. Then blame Hamas.
Extremists on both sides?
This was known in 1922. Hamas didn't exist until 1987.
Do you think that the rise of likes of Hamas may have been due to the aims of the "victim"?
Assuming that almost all voters are still alive doesn't quick match gives around 15% of the current population voting for Hamas in 2006? That's also assuming that everyone voted.
75.9% of the population were minors or not born in 2006.
The nurse that was healing the patient in floor 7 had connections to Hamas, so we had to bomb the 6 floors below as well. Not our fault she was using the patients in 6 floors as human shields.
This is where you do yourself no favours. That But is quite important.
And questions can be loaded, they are not just neutral because they are questions. We had that with other questions in this thread.
I'm not sure what your point about Crimea is, but whether it was 30 years, 300 years, or 30 months ago, annexation or occupation of people against their will is just wrong,
I find it frankly disgusting and racist that Sunak cant bring himself to mention British nationals in Gaza working with the Palestinians, when he talks about safeguarding brits in the crisis.
Which poll are you referring to? The over 50% support of Hamas within Gaza?
I heard it in a German political talk show from one of the experts there.
Here is in excerpt from article about it.
"A June 2023 poll conducted by Khalil Shikaki, professor of political science and director of the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research, indicated that 79% of Gazans supported armed opposition to Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory. A Washington Institute poll from July 2023 found that only 57% of Gazans held a “somewhat positive” opinion of Hamas."
He didn't say that.
And killing/injuring people or stealing their home because you won a war 55 years ago, is one hell of a point. Is there any current and similar example that is accepted?
No it's pretty unique, and if we must look to history, there are no parallels that I can think of that we now think of as just.
Also, we have progressed where self-determination is concerned. History is most valuable in showing us our mistakes, not justifying horrors.
It's the same in real life, the most ardent supporters of Israel in the US aren't even Jewish-Americans, it's those nutty evangelicals that think Jesus will come back once ethnic cleansing is complete or something
You can of course entitled to your own opinion and believe people aren't responsible for their government.
I think otherwise, probably due to being raised in a nation filled with guilt about what happened during WW2.
I am sorry you feel that way.
But just to pick you up on what you have just said.
Because that is very significant.
Someone pro one side who reflect this in their posts, riles other posters.
The title of this thread is:
Israel - Palestine discussion.
The important word being Discussion.
Not that you can only post if you agree with one side.
That is censorship.
So using this logic Israeli citizens are responsible for their government and therefore aren't innocent? Because no matter how you try and justify it, the Israeli government has killed far more civilians and is responsible for far more terror than Hamas. Although they visit that terror upon brown people so maybe it doesn't count.
You said you grew up in Luxemburg, Belgium, Netherlands and France.