The Student Room Group

So-called anti-zionism

Scroll to see replies

Original post by felamaslen
wat


You claimed Hamas were jihadi. They're not, that's just factually incorrect.
Original post by Bornblue
Jewish isn't an ethnicity. It's a religion.
You get Jews from all different places and all different races. You have Ashkenazis and sephardim.

Israeli is an ethnicity, English is an ethnicity. Jewish is not. I'm Jewish and I am not the same ethnicity as people born in Israel, or Jews born in Africa, or China or Mexico or Spain etc.

Apples and oranges. Don't conflate nationality with religion.
Ethnicity is about where a person was from. Judaism is a religion.

The fact that people can convert away from Judaism proves this. If I denounce my Judaism I am no longer Jewish, you can't denounce your ethnicity.


You're not Jewish. You're very ignorant about Judaism.

Nevertheless

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matrilineality_in_Judaism
Original post by SotonianOne
You're not Jewish. You're very ignorant about Judaism.

Nevertheless

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matrilineality_in_Judaism


I am Jewish.
By any definition of the word Judaism is not an ethnicity. If someone converts to Judaism they do not change their ethnicity, they do not change where they were born, they change their religion.

How can it possibly be an ethnicity when you have African Jews, European jews, Sephardic jews? Jews from China?

If you're born in England you are English, if you're born in Israel youre Israeli. Being Jewish is not a matter of where you are born like being English is.
As to that link- according to Certain factions of Judaism, if you're mother is Jewish you are too. But that's according to the religion itself, nothing else. According to Islam, if you declare you believe in Allah you are a Muslim. Religions, rules for being a member in no way mean it's an ethnicity.

But even following that line, even if you say if you're mother is Jewish then you are- it is not an ethnicity, it's a passed down religion. I am not the same ethnicity as Jews in China.

Calling Judaism an ethnicity is just factually incorrect. You clearly don't understand the word 'ethnicity'.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Bornblue
You claimed Hamas were jihadi. They're not, that's just factually incorrect.


Hamas are a typical example of a jihadist organisation.
Original post by felamaslen
Hamas are a typical example of a jihadist organisation.


They're not jihadist. That's just factually incorrect. Hence why Isis -who are jihadist- are threatening to replace Hamas.
Jihadists 'ambitions' are global, Hamas's 'ambitions' are local so to speak.

They're a terrorsist group for sure but they are not jihadist and to call them so indicates that you don't know what 'jihadist' actually means.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Bornblue
They're not jihadist. That's just factually incorrect. Hence why Isis -who are jihadist- are threatening to replace Hamas.
Jihadists 'ambitions' are global, Hamas's 'ambitions' are local so to speak.

They're a terrorsist group for sure but they are not jihadist and to call them so indicates that you don't know what 'jihadist' actually means.


They want to turn Israel into an Islamic state, and are fighting in the usual Islamist way for that aim. They are an armed offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood, a self-styled Islamist organisation. Calling them anything other than jihadists is inaccurate.

IS wanting to replace Hamas in the Gaza strip is a bit like Hitler wanting to replace Mussolini in Italy. Both Hitler and Mussolini were fascists; both IS and Hamas are Islamist jihadists.

It is possible for one to be part of the global jihad while concentrating on a small area of the world.
Original post by felamaslen
They want to turn Israel into an Islamic state, and are fighting in the usual Islamist way for that aim. They are an armed offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood, a self-styled Islamist organisation. Calling them anything other than jihadists is inaccurate.

IS wanting to replace Hamas in the Gaza strip is a bit like Hitler wanting to replace Mussolini in Italy. Both Hitler and Mussolini were fascists; both IS and Hamas are Islamist jihadists.

It is possible for one to be part of the global jihad while concentrating on a small area of the world.

They're not jihadist though. They don't aim to take over the world.
They may be a lot of things but jihadist is not one of them.
Hence the conflicts between Hamas and IS.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Bornblue
They're not jihadist though. They don't aim to take over the world.
They may be a lot of things but jihadist is not one of them.
Hence the conflicts between Hamas and IS.


So I'm guessing the group in the Gaza strip which calls itself "Islamic Jihad", is not a jihadist group in your view?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Jihad_Movement_in_Palestine
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by felamaslen
So I'm guessing the group in the Gaza strip which calls itself "Islamic Jihad", is not a jihadist group in your view?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Jihad_Movement_in_Palestine


That's a separate group from Hamas which is the entire point.
Hamas, for all they are- are not jihadist which was your original point.
Original post by Bornblue
That's a separate group from Hamas which is the entire point.
Hamas, for all they are- are not jihadist which was your original point.


What is the difference between Hamas and PIJ?
Original post by felamaslen
What is the difference between Hamas and PIJ?


They're different organisations. Pij is jihadist , Hamas are localist.

Some of their aims overlap, but as to your initial point, Hamas are not jihadist.
Original post by Bornblue
They're different organisations. Pij is jihadist , Hamas are localist.

Some of their aims overlap, but as to your initial point, Hamas are not jihadist.


What is global about the aims of PIJ?
Original post by felamaslen
What is global about the aims of PIJ?


They're jihadist!!!
They want to fight the 'holy war' and to kill all non-believers etc. they support Isis and want to destroy the 'west'
Hamas want to destroy Israel. Their aims are local not global unlike pij.
Original post by Bornblue
They're jihadist!!!
They want to fight the 'holy war' and to kill all non-believers etc. they support Isis and want to destroy the 'west'
Hamas want to destroy Israel. Their aims are local not global unlike pij.


And yet both groups' fundamental aim is to create an Islamic state where Israel is currently.
Original post by felamaslen
And yet both groups' fundamental aim is to create an Islamic state where Israel is currently.


Which itsself is not jihadist. Jihadists have GLOBAL aims. Hamas have LOCAL aims. Hamas are not jihadist as a matter of fact. What part don't you get?
Original post by Bornblue
Which itsself is not jihadist. Jihadists have GLOBAL aims. Hamas have LOCAL aims. Hamas are not jihadist as a matter of fact. What part don't you get?


I don't get what meaningful distinction there is between a jihadist and Hamas.

Anyway, PIJ's aims aren't global. They're concentrating on the same (small) region as Hamas. Boko Haram are concentrating on Nigeria. IS are concentrating on the Levant and parts of Libya. The Taliban are concentrating on Afghanistan and parts of Pakistan.

All groups are part of the same twisted ideology.
Original post by felamaslen
I don't get what meaningful distinction there is between a jihadist and Hamas.

Anyway, PIJ's aims aren't global. They're concentrating on the same (small) region as Hamas. Boko Haram are concentrating on Nigeria. IS are concentrating on the Levant and parts of Libya. The Taliban are concentrating on Afghanistan and parts of Pakistan.

All groups are part of the same twisted ideology.


I'll simplify it for you.
You called Hamas a Jihadist organisation.
They are not.
They may be a terrorist group, they may wish to destroy Israel but they do not believe in 'Jihad' or the 'Holy War'.
They are not Jihadist.
Original post by Bornblue
I'll simplify it for you.
You called Hamas a Jihadist organisation.
They are not.
They may be a terrorist group, they may wish to destroy Israel but they do not believe in 'Jihad' or the 'Holy War'.
They are not Jihadist.


You're not addressing any of my points so I'll just abandon this argument as a waste of both of our time.
Original post by felamaslen
You're not addressing any of my points so I'll just abandon this argument as a waste of both of our time.


That's because your argument is factually incorrect. like arguing that Stalin was jihadist- it's just wrong.
Original post by TheBlackWatch
And the Holocaust proved right all those who had advocated for Zionism before World War 2; the Jews need a state of their own, a place to which they can flee.


Unless you're saying that they predicted the Holocaust before the Nazi Party even existed, I fail to see how you can regard them as having been 'proven right', apart from in a very vague sense which would be essentially arguing that no ethnic group can ever be safe as a minority in a country, but only in a separate state in which they form the majority. Such an argument would have (and has had) quite disturbing conclusions and consequences.

I would advocate Israel cedes certain northern areas to a new Arab Israeli state that will remain in overall association with Israel (free trade, etc).


And if the Arab Israelis don't want that (and I don't see why they would)?

I don't have any inherent objections to it. If the Romani, like the Jews did, want to go and buy certain areas of Romania from the Romanians, and live there, maybe with some form of federal association, that sounds fine to me.


Buying land wouldn't create of its own accord any political changes, simply a particular concentration of Romani-owned land.

The Romani would buy land from the existing inhabitants just as the Jews did. Like most "anti-zionists", you seem to be under the misapprehension that Israeli Jews turned up in landing crafts, invaded Palestine, kicked the Arabs out and moved into their houses.

In fact, purchase of lands from Arabs was the predominant method of obtaining housing.


OK, a few things here:
- While the early settlers did buy the land the settled on, the majority (though not all) of this land was not bought from 'the existing inhabitants', but rather from quasi-feudal absentee landlords, most of whom didn't actually live in Palestine, with the tenants then being evicted by the settlers.
- Even by 1947, this land purchase still had only bought ~6% of the land in Palestine.
- As noted above with the Romani hypothetical example, this merely created a noticeably high concentration of Jewish-owned land in a particular area. Real estate is somewhat different to political territory.

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you