Anonymous #1 1d

they’re just civilians though

8

Anonymous OP 1d

They’re occupiers in indigenous lands. And honestly, only good can come from yt colonizers dying.

-2

Anonymous #1 1d

The civilians alive there currently had nothing to do with it. The issue is the government that continues the war. We can’t just expect civilians to move if they don’t support the government? Im sure you and I both dislike Trump very much, and it’d be unfair of other populations to want us dead and affiliate us with his mindset, and the mindset of our ancestors who also stole last, would it not be?

6

Anonymous OP 1d

ancestors who also stole land*

8

Comment Deleted

0

oh so you’re just racist 😭

1

Anonymous OP 1d

Can’t be racist to yts.

-1

Anonymous OP 1d

deadass nazi mentality

6

Anonymous #1 1d

then you’re discriminatory 😭

8

Comment Deleted

0

Anonymous OP 1d

Okay? Do you think I give a fuck about you? In 100 years there won’t be any of you left.

-3

there’s no point in arguing about this smh

8

Anonymous #1 1d

literally how could you believe this 😭

10

Anonymous OP 1d

It’s ok to mourn the citizens on all sides, they’re civilians, the government and military are the ones committing genocide

16

Anonymous #2 1d

You do know Israel has mandatory military service, right? The only difference between a civilian and a soldier is turning 18.

-3

Anonymous #1 1d

Ok, it’s still ok to mourn civilians

12

Anonymous #2 1d

And it’s okay not to😂 cry harder, colonizer.

-4

Anonymous OP 1d

Believe what? Do you understand the demographic change happening in your own country? You aren’t even the majority among Gen Z. You’re dying out.

-3

Anonymous #1 1d

Ok

11

Anonymous #2 1d

Downvote harder, it won’t bring your birth rates back up.

-3

Anonymous #1 1d

there will still be white people though lmao

11

Anonymous #1 1d

What are you talking about

8

Anonymous #2 1d

I’m talking about the fact that the world is slowly ridding itself of the colonizer race and bringing the planet back into equilibrium. Are you stupid?

-3

Anonymous OP 1d

Not after a long enough time. In a few generations you’ll be a sliver of the population in all of your countries.

-3

Anonymous #1 1d

I wanted to point out that even though you’re not white, you’re still supporting a system that lives on stolen land. I imagine you went to college since you’re on yikyak, and I imagine you have a house/apartment, and you have a job. All of those contribute to a system that is built on an ideology that you don’t support. When you really boil it down, you are no better than the many people you believe deserve to die.

14

Anonymous OP 1d

My family was colonized and starved by British imperialists. I’m here taking back the wealth you plundered from the third world.

0

Anonymous #1 1d

What is a colonizer in your opinion?

15

Comment Deleted

0

No seriously what would you say is a colonizer in your opinion

13

Anonymous #1 1d

you’re still paying a government and a people group that you wish to kill… why don’t you move?

14

Anonymous OP 1d

I’m paying yts? I don’t remember doing that.

-2

Anonymous #2 1d

I just told you. Yts.

-2

Anonymous #1 1d

I work at flower shop I don’t think I’m a colonizer, I would have thought you’d have a good answer from how strongly you feel about this

6

Anonymous #2 1d

Yt people: I sell flowers, sorry my ancestors pillaged, raped, and destroyed the entire world!

0

Anonymous #1 1d

taxes -> government ran by whites

12

Anonymous #1 1d

I didn’t do that, but while your assuming who do you think my ancestors were

15

Comment Deleted

0

Anonymous OP 1d

There are plenty of non-whites in the government, and that number will only grow as your population declines. Why would I leave when I can make more money here and then just have a bunch of brown kids (more kids than you’ll have). Seems pretty easy.

-2

Anonymous #1 1d

you claim all Israeli citizens deserve to die because they live on stolen land while your own money is going towards ICE funds and military spending that help defend America’s stolen land… it’s just very flawed reasoning

4

I didn’t know Peruvians were crackers, someone should have told me that

13

Anonymous #1 1d

i don’t want a lot of kids because I don’t want to contribute to overpopulation 😂

4

Anonymous #2 1d

How would I know what your nationality is? You led me to believe you were a cracker by giving me a justification as to why you aren’t a colonizer when I told you that yts are colonizers. The fact that you think I give a fuck about you is so funny lmao

-2

Anonymous OP 1d

Thanks! You’re doing the world a service.

-2

Anonymous #1 1d

I gave you no evidence to make you believe that, I just said it’s ok to mourn civilians

14

Anonymous #1 1d

I’m also a minority and you’re unwell

11

Anonymous #1 1d

not even tryna make counter pints anymore i see 😭

11

Anonymous OP 1d

ICE’s efforts are futile. Yts aren’t having enough babies to avoid being replaced by us🤣 how hard is it for you to understand?

1

Anonymous #1 1d

You mean you’re benefiting from capitalists who colonized and stole from minority owned businesses and families?

13

Anonymous OP 1d

Why would I argue about you not having children? It’s good for the world and for the country. You people have terrorized the world for way too long.

-1

Anonymous #4 1d

They stole from my people and my family. God forbid I get a little something back🤣

0

Anonymous #4 1d

Keep licking that yt boot!

0

Anonymous #1 1d

america currently has a 51% majority white population lol idk where you’re getting your numbers but you’re still supporting a government that is living on stolen land which by your definition means you deserve to die

3

Anonymous #1 1d

So to you, it’s okay to support a system that benefits from the slaughter and theft of minorities. Got it!

3

Anonymous #2 1d

Lol the more of you that come to amerikkka the faster the crackers will be replaced. I’m not complaining

-3

Anonymous #4 1d

Look around you lol there’s less and less yts every year. You’re coping with the fact that your people are going extinct.

0

Anonymous #1 1d

I’m not white. Try again. Why is it good that you support a system that benefits by murdering and stealing from non white people?

1

Anonymous OP 1d

And it was 90% a couple centuries ago. Do you know what a trend is? The majority of births now are to non-white mothers.

1

Anonymous #1 1d

I don’t mind living with any race of people it doesn’t bother me, I like everyone if they are respectful people

9

Anonymous #2 1d

That’s good! I appreciate your efforts.

-1

Anonymous #1 1d

Answer. Why are you okay with supporting a system that benefits from the theft of minorities?

1

Anonymous #4 1d

America will be a majority-minority country soon. These are the last years of it being a “white country.” That’s why.

2

Anonymous #1 1d

So you’re okay with supporting a system that kills and steals from non whites because it hurts some white people. Got it. You support the slaughter and theft from non white people then

3

Anonymous #4 1d

How does America steal from non-whites? It literally is a half non-white country and will eventually become entirely nonwhite.

0

Anonymous #1 1d

Now you’re pretending not to know after giving me a reason why you support a system that slaughters and steals from non whites??

3

Anonymous #4 1d

America is literally half brown. It’s 2026, the country doesn’t steal from non-whites, it IS non-white.

-2

Anonymous #1 1d

Actually crazy or ragebaiter pretending to be crazy, call it

9

Anonymous #5 1d

Also even if they’re a ragebaiter wait till they learn the majority of the Israeli population originates from middle eastern or African countries

12

Anonymous #5 1d

And that a number of the victims of October 7 were Israeli Arabs and Thai migrant workers

14

Anonymous #5 1d

And that colonization and the displacement of indigenous peoples in the United States is not an exclusively white pattern and that black, Hispanic, and Asian people have participated in and benefited from the genocide and ethnic cleansing of Native Americans. Because history is complex.

11

Anonymous #1 23h

You already gave reasons as to why you support it knowing it does those things. You can try to pretend you didn’t but you already accepted the premise

1

Anonymous #1 19h

You can’t colonize your own homeland.

0

Anonymous #6 19h

The African-American colonization of Liberia, Afro-British colonization of Sierra Leone, Japanese colonization of Korea, and many Scots in the colonization of Northern Ireland were all people settler colonizing areas in which their ancestors came from. Heck, so is the Nazi colonization of Ukraine and the European colonization of Africa if you go back far enough.

4

Anonymous #5 19h

Zionists viewed it as a form of settler colonialism. Colonialism was not a bad word back then. Ze’ev Jhabotinsky explicitly refers to the Palestinians as natives resisting colonization. The Jewish Palestine Colonization Association was called that for a reason.

5

Anonymous #5 19h

Colonialism was not only not a bad word back then, but had a fundamentally different meaning. Still, you should be able to recognize the differences between (Liberia, Sierra Leone, Korea, Ireland) and Israel without me pointing it out to you.

1

Anonymous #5 18h

And, for that matter, many areas Israel has colonized or is actively colonizing such as Gaza, the Negev, Ashkelon, the Sinai, and South Lebanon were not historically Jewish.

3

Anonymous #6 18h

They aren’t fundamentally different. Liberia and Sierra Leone were extremely similar. A persecuted diasporic ethnic minority pursuing a colonial project in their ancestral place of origin to liberate themselves from oppression, in the process turning the local inhabitants who never left into second class citizens.

1

Anonymous #5 18h

Zionist thinkers compared Israel to contemporary colonial projects. Theodor Herzl considered Kenya and Argentina as alternative sites. Ben-Gurion backed the Hebrew Labor movement, saying he didn’t want Israel to become like South Africa where the colonists solely existed as an elite upper class. Jhabotinsky compared it to the American Great Plains and Spanish Mexico.

1

Anonymous #5 18h

When you say “ancestral place of origin” you mean “generally somewhere in Africa”.

1

Anonymous #6 18h

West Africa more specifically. Sierra Leone was actually disproportionately the point of origin for many slaves in the Atlantic colonies and the Bahamas.

1

Anonymous #5 18h

Point of origin within the Transatlantic slave trade, but not a cultural point of origin.

1

Anonymous #6 18h

Oh, you mean diasporic cultures change during their time in diaspora and adopt new cultural traits which would not be recognizable to their ancestors? You mean like how rabbinic Judaism only developed after the destruction of the second temple?

1

Anonymous #5 18h

These are two fundamentally different claims, and I’m not sure if it’s because you misunderstood what I said. West Africa is the epicenter of the slave trade. Most slaves themselves were not West African.

1

Anonymous #6 18h

Are you referring to the quantity that came from west-central Africa or to slaves being born in the new world. Many slaves came from west-central Africa yes. Many of the original colonists (particularly of Sierra Leone) also originated along the Gold Coast, or along the Rice Coast where Liberia and Sierra Leone was founded.

1

Anonymous #5 18h

So now it’s West-Central Africa. Wonder how wide that net is gonna get if I keep making very short, obvious responses.

1

Anonymous #6 18h

Some came from west-central Africa, others came from west Africa. Many of the American settlers in Liberia were Gullah with their ancestral origins along that very stretch of coastline (the Rice Coast was targeted for Atlantic rice plantations). The Jamaican maroons in Sierra Leone came from Ghana, Thomas Peters was born in Yorubaland, Harry Washington was born in Senegambia.

1

Anonymous #6 18h

Is your argument “noooooo this counts as colonization because many didn’t come EXACTLY from Liberia and Sierra Leone but that’s not the case for Israel” when diasporic Jewish genetics show mixed ancestry, when non-Israelite descended populations such as the Subbotniks Beta Israel participate in Zionism, and when colonized areas like the Negev were never part of any Jewish state.

1

Anonymous #5 18h

Would you determine the validity of a repatriation campaign on the basis of a blood quantum?

1

Anonymous #6 18h

I wouldn’t. Because I don’t think colonization is justified by someone having ancestry from somewhere in the deep past. Colonization is a distinct process, said process is not changed by ancestry.

1

Anonymous #5 18h

Youre the one who claimed Zionist colonization doesn’t count as such on the basis of ancestry. I didn’t.

1

Anonymous #5 18h

I would mostly agree, ancestry in a region alone isn’t enough to justify it. Ancestry, an unwavering claim to the land in spite of dispossession by empire and colonial powers, and a continuous cultural link and ebb and flow of migration over thousands of years though…

1

Anonymous #5 18h

I said homeland. That’s more than ancestry. I have ancestry in Scotland, but I have no cultural ties there. When my ancestors have prayed for thousands of years, they weren’t praying for Scotland.

1

Anonymous #6 18h

“An unwavering claim to the land” so saying it’s yours? Anyone can fuckin do that lol. Your claim seems to be that if someone wants the land enough that gives them a moral right to take it from the people who live there now.

1

Anonymous #5 18h

Anyone can claim the land, but would we judge a claim from random foreigner #4 as equal to the claim of the people who had a state there for over 1,000 years and continued living there after dispossession for another 2,000?

1

Anonymous #5 18h

And having historic links to the land and historic migration back and forth? So like the Italian conquests of Libya, Croatia, Greece, and Albania based on historic Roman territories. Ooo ooo or maybe the Turkish invasion of northern Cyprus And again, no historic links to the Negev, Askhelon, Gaza, Lebanon, or the Sinai. Colonized anyways. I have a strong cultural connection to Ireland. Unlike you, my diasporic identity remains strong. Do I get to start kicking people out of their houses now?

1

Anonymous #5 18h

I’ll trade you the Negev and Gaza for the West Bank. :)

1

Anonymous #6 18h

I notice you neglecting to mention that the majority of the Jews and Samaritans who never left converted to Christianity and Islam and became Palestinians, who are now getting ethnically cleansed.

1

Anonymous #5 17h

lol “Palestinians are the real Jews” meme That’s a supposition, but if true then they no longer have a cultural link to the group who claim the land.

1

Anonymous #6 17h

Once again not mentioning that there were people who never left and now they’re getting genocided. I have absolutely no problem with people moving to Israel. The problem is creating an ethnostate that excludes the native inhabitants and proceeding to ethnically cleanse them.

1

Anonymous #5 17h

Sounds like we agree in principle that people have a right to live in their cultural homeland, and we’re just encountering friction born out of historical realities. Chief among them, Palestinians not wanting any more Jews in the area.

1

Anonymous #6 17h

Genetics conclusively show that both Palestinians and the majority of diasporic Jews are descended from the same ancestral Canaanite, Jewish, and Samaritan populations. “They no longer have a cultural link to the group who claim the land” oh so now genocide is ok if culture has changed. All culture fucking changes, genius. The Jews of the Bar Kohkba revolt spoke Aramaic and Greek, not Hebrew. Genesis was written in Babylonia.

1

Anonymous #6 17h

You know that after the Anglo-Saxons invaded England, the majority of the native Brythonic population was anglicized, save for those who kept a foothold in Wales, and who made an extensive corpus of literature (such as the Armes Prydein) longing for the expulsion of the English and the re-unification of Briton. So do you think if the welsh got enough weapons, it’s fine for them to ethnically cleanse the English?

1

Anonymous #6 17h

“The real villains here are the ones who don’t want to get kicked out of their houses”

1

Anonymous #5 17h

Who was kicked out of their house before 1948?

1

Anonymous #5 17h

I believe in the freedom of movement of people. I think Jews should have been allowed to move to Palestine, just as I support the movement of Teutonic Germans, Bosniaks, Armenians, and Greeks to Palestine. But that freedom ends when it begins to displace the people already live there, and when you try to found an ethnostate which would marginalize them. That’s the problem. Palestine should have been a secular state for Christians, Jews, Muslims, Samaritans, and Druze to all live together.

1

Anonymous #5 17h

So, to be super clear, who was displaced before 1948? Or, to be maximally charitable, before the beginnings of Plan Dalet in 1947?

1

Anonymous #6 17h

Well there were the 20+ Arab villages displacement by the Sursock Purchases, where absentee landlords sold their lands to Jewish organizations, and the tenant farmers had to move. But again, that’s still consensual purchases. The stuff prior to 1948 isn’t what I have a problem with. That was all voluntary purchases. It’s what happened in 1948 onwards.

1

Anonymous #6 17h

As I said, there were tenant farmers who were displaced, and while that was consensual purchases from the elite landowners rather than government ethnic cleansing, the displacement of those now landless farmers to cities was a primary motivation for the Arab riots which occurred in the 1930s.

1

Anonymous #5 17h

So you have a problem with the Yishuv reactions to the Arab Revolts and impending multinational invasions which you seem to believe were unjustified, and can admit that no one was displaced from their rightful homes by Jewish land purchases, but Israel should have completely ignored the past thirty years of Jewish-Arab history in the region and the third pillar they would create and let everyone back in who left hoping the Arab armies would kill all the Jews?

1

Anonymous #5 17h

Again, my problem is primarily with the Israeli state massacring Arabs, razing villages, and continuing to ethnically cleanse into the modern day. This isn’t just stuff happening in the past, the government is *still* committing expansionist ethnic cleansing.

1

Anonymous #5 17h

I agree the things that happen in the West Bank under military occupation are very bad. If Palestinians had ever had a leader who had been interested in actually negotiating a permanent solution to the conflict I think these things would not be happening, but they had Arafat.

1

Anonymous #6 17h

Dude, an Israeli murdered their prime minister when he signed a peace agreement, and then Israel went “backsies” and started colonizing more of the West Bank. The current Israeli government has outright said they will not allow the creation of a Palestinian state, and has funded groups like Hamas to weaken the Palestinian authority precisely because the PA was willing to negotiate and that made them more legitimate.

1

Anonymous #5 17h

Shits like saying it’s the Cherokee’s fault that the trail of tears happened.

1

Anonymous #5 17h

Yeah, the Second Intifada brain raped a lot of Israelis for at least a generation. Palestinians were never going to get concessions out of this government, but failed to realize that violence against Israelis is what created this government.

1

Anonymous #5 17h

Here’s what the Israeli officials have been saying about the concept of peace for decades (this was from 19 years ago)

2

Anonymous #6 17h

This is the cycle of settler colonialism. The colonial power commits continuing violence against the colonized people so that eventually they get so fed up that they rise up, and that gives the colonial state further justification for ethnic cleansing. It’s exactly what America did on the Great Plains. Gazans tried peacefully protecting in 2018. They were mowed down with gunfire.

1

Anonymous #5 17h

It’s what Turkey did in Armenia too. The deaths during the Turkish invasion of Armenian and the Armenian revolts in Van etc were used as justification for eradication of Armenian “terrorists”

1

Anonymous #5 17h

Yes, the modern radicalization of Israelis is in a MASSIVE part due to how badly Jews were treated in the Muslim countries after 1948 into the 1970s. But that’s not the fault of the Palestinians.

1

Anonymous #5 17h

So if the Palestinian authority agreeing to the Oslo accords just gave Israel free rein to colonize the West Bank, and if Palestinians protesting in Gaza causes them to get gunned down, what else could happen? If Israel intentionally punishes Palestinians for seeking peace, obviously peace will not be sought.

1

Anonymous #5 17h

It’s been Israeli policy for decades to start fights as an excuse to grab land

1

Anonymous #5 17h

I don’t really want to get into the weeds of the Great March of Return because it’s tedious, but my recollection is that basically all of the Palestinians killed during the major days of unrest are claimed by either Hamas or PIJ as fighters. It’s not Israel saying they’re enemy combatants, Hamas/PIJ admit it.

1

Anonymous #6 17h

You mean like the 46 children? Hamas considers the people killed martyrs for protesting in support of Palestine. And for the record the Israeli defense minister said “You have to understand, there are no innocent people in the Gaza Strip”. Some of those killed were part of the militant wing (I believe about 24%). That’s actually a lower percentage than the number of IDF members killed on October 7. I still think October 7 was wrong.

1

Anonymous #5 17h

Hamas and PIJ do recruit children as mujahid but I’m not sure about the proportions overall.

1

Anonymous #5 17h

Calling the people being genocided all militant terrorists is one of the most common ways to justify genocide. Guatemalan genocide, Nama and Herero Genocide, Armenian Genocide, Greek Genocide, Assyrian Genocide. Hell, wasn’t that basically what Rome did when it ethnically cleansed Judea.

3

Anonymous #5 16h

If the Arabs had successfully killed or expelled all the Jews in 1948, do you think they would’ve bothered with this justification?

1

Anonymous #6 16h

I mean, probably. The Lehi and Irgun were both considered Zionist terrorist organizations by the United Kingdom. When Egypt forcibly expelled its Jewish population it was calling them Zionist terrorists (and used similar rhetoric for the expelled Greeks, Italians, and Maltese). The Arabs would probably word it a bit different, “foreign invaders,” maybe similar rhetoric to what Algerians said about the Pied-Noirs.

5

Anonymous #5 16h

So it’s only in defeat that they felt brave enough to say “Jews” I guess

1