>>37028The IDF has the most restrictive ROE im aware of. They try to make sure every single incident has a real time 'criminalization', which is a process by which, even when fighting enemy combatants who are blatantly declaring themselves such, they have justification by knowing who and why they are trying to kill. This goes to show the liberalization in the IDF, they try to give miniature trials even to open enemy combatants during operations, because of course doesnt everyone deserve a fair trial? This is a unique thing because they are still very zionist and see their job as protecting the state no matter what, but the worldview they have is the same western leftist worldview, they just have a singular priority.
Now, the reason i say supporting israel is important is because outside of israel it is mainly the israeli government (which represents its people) that we think of as israel. So i mean supporting their government and citizens. There has been growing realization amongst them what the nature of the palestinians is, and that is the best bet to stop it because israeli jews are not yet entirely suppressed by western ideas.
So now is when explaining palestinians is important for this to all make sense:
The region was part of the ottoman empire. It was a backwater and there was not a high population density there. Living there were some jewish communities that have always been there for the last two thousand years, but mainly various muslim communities, and as it was ottoman it was of course governed by an ottoman governor. Starting in the 19th century, or maybe the late 18th century, jews from europe started trickling back, since jews are commanded to live there if they can by one of their 613 laws. Since the situation in europe was hostile towards jews at various times many started thinking they may as well just go do it if its going to be hostile all the same. By the last years of the ottoman empire there were several developed jewish areas where jews had bought land from the ottomans and lived there legally.
During WW1 the british promised the local muslims that if they helped the allies overthrow the ottomans (who were part of the central powers) they would get the land. After ww1 ended and the ottomans collapsed the anglo anglod and held onto it for a while. During this period both muslim and jewish groups did various things of various levels of hostility to try and make the british go away. Also during this time the british imported workers from egypt and other nearby places for their construction projects trying to build up the area.
Eventually the locals made enough of an annoyance that the british decided to leave. Since there were well rooted and established jewish and muslim communities in the area, they thought it would be a good idea to just give them both soverignty with a two state solution, making the areas jews lived in israel(what jews called it), and the areas the muslims lived in palestine(what the romans called it). The jews agreed, the UN agreed, everyone agreed, except the palestinians.
Now on what ground they did disagree really? Was it as the modern leftist imagines, with white people coming in and displacing the poor browns with force to make a western colony? No, it was not.
Who are palestinians, who were the ottomans, and what is islam?
Islam is a religion, and as our western liberal values tell us that is protected. It says so right in the constitution. Islam is also a political system that seeks to conquer the world, specifically focusing on land. Land is very important in islam, gaining and controlling land is acting righteously and losing land is the biggest insult one can suffer. The land itself must be under islamic rule. Caring about converting actual people is a secondary thing and in fact islam is happy to have dhimis because who doesnt enjoy a good underclass with less legal protections? Islam also sees itself as one grand unified kingdom, temporarily fragmented into smaller groupings. So do not think in terms of national identities here, when the palestinians say the land is 'theirs', they mean that it is 'islams', specifically it was made 'dar al islam' and so now belongs to islam, forever. So their objection to the two state solution proposed is not that their homes were being stolen, but that a non muslim cannot be allowed to administrate over it. They also feel this way about spain, but to a muslim there is nothing lower than a jew, and so while europeans temporarily having spain back hurts, it does not hurt anywhere near as much as jews controlling anything.
And those palestinians? How many were originally living there and how many were workers imported by the british, or just migrants from surounding arab places? Who is to say? But they are all palestinians and there was no such thing before yasser arafat invented the cultural identity. So what a palestinian is is 'the local muslims who are upset that jews have soverign rule over land that was once muslim, and as the local muslims it is on their honor to try and fix it'. And because they are salafists, they are not bothered by perhaps classical imperial islamic ideas or practices, it simply says in the book to go jihad so they do it. Some might read it another way, but its all really up to personal interpretation. Truly the only saving grace the west has is that you are supposed to kill heretics and so they spend a lot of time fighting each other, another quality of leftists ill point out, and why i described earlier the leftist tendency to fixate on their own issue.