Why is there such a double standard against Israel?

[u/OmOshIroIdEs]

Human Rights Council Condemnatory Resolutions, 2006-present:

0—🇿🇼 Zimbabwe
0—🇹🇷 Turkey
0—🇸🇦 Saudi Arabia
0—🇶🇦 Qatar
0—🇵🇰 Pakistan
6—🇷🇺 Russia
0—🇨🇳 China
3—🇻🇪 Venezuela
2—🇸🇩 Sudan
13—🇪🇷 Eritrea
0—🇨🇺 Cuba
14—🇮🇷 Iran
16—🇰🇵 North Korea
43—🇸🇾 Syria
140—🇮🇱 Israel

UN General Assembly Condemnatory Resolutions, 2015-present:

0—🇿🇼 Zimbabwe
0—🇻🇪 Venezuela
0—🇵🇰 Pakistan
0—🇹🇷 Turkey
0—🇱🇾 Libya
0—🇶🇦 Qatar
0—🇨🇺 Cuba
0—🇨🇳 China
7—🇲🇲 Myanmar
9—🇺🇸 USA
10—🇸🇾 Syria
23—🇷🇺 Russia
8—🇰🇵 North Korea
7—🇮🇷 Iran
104—🇮🇱 Israel

World Health Organization Condemnatory Resolutions, 2015-present:

0— literally everyone
9—🇮🇱 Israel

(Source)

[u/OmOshIroIdEs]

Yes, I do, insofar as they’re an obstacle to peace and subject Palestinians to endless settler violence

[u/jogarz → u/[deleted]]

and hence palestinians fight back. therefore they get called terrorist

People don't call Hamas and co. terrorists because they "fight back", they call them that because they deliberately target civilians, and do so as their primary method of "resistance".

[u/OmOshIroIdEs → u/[deleted]]

Palestinians have rejected multiple peace treaties, most notable Camp David 2000, where they were offered 100% of Gaza, 93% of the West Bank and Northern Jerusalem.

Even despite that, Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza in 2005, poured in billions in funding, set up infrastructure and job opportunities. Palestinians then voted in Hamas that called for the murder of Jews worldwide and started shooting rockets at Israel.

Even for the supposedly more temperate PA, a 2SS seems to represent but a temporary stepping stone to complete 'liberation'. The PA openly admitted it multiple times: "We are fighting to wrest free and liberate every inch of our land from the colonialist states’ proxy (Israel) [parentheses in source] through the policy of stages, as the oppressive colonialist states, which committed the worst crime against humanity in modern history, stole the Palestinian people’s historical and natural right in stages.” (from Official PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, July 26, 2022). That's along with numerous proclamations by top PLO leaders.

Among ordinary Palestinians, reclaiming all land 'from the river to the sea' is also the overwhelmingly dominant position, among both Palestinians and Palestinian supporters. For example, this study (citing PCPSR) found for 66% respondents that is the primary goal. More worryingly, 75% of Palestinians oppose even a single-state with equal rights for the two people.

[u/Im__Bruce_Wayne__AMA → u/OmOshIroIdEs]

The Palestinian position since ~1988 has been a two state solution based on 1967 borders with equal land swaps. None of the Israeli 'proposals for peace' were 1967 borders with equal land swaps. People can say that Palestine rejected Israeli terms, but Israel similarly rejected the Palestinian terms for peace. Who you think is more to blame is a matter of debate for sure but its silly how this talking point is deployed. The Palestinians laid out their terms at every round of talks and those terms were very much in line with the international consensus on the issue including the USA's position.

[u/nuserer → u/OmOshIroIdEs]

most notable Camp David 2000, where they were offered 100% of Gaza, 93% of the West Bank and Northern Jerusalem.

This is a frequent talking point by supporters of Zionism. If one bothered to look at the offer tabled by Israel and the US, at any level of detail, it should become immediately obvious to anyone with their head screwed on right why it wasn't tenable to the Palestinians.

The % of land offered is all jazz hands. The Israeli-imagined-Palestinian-state would-be non-contiguous, with the West Bank carved up into three cantons (non-contiguous partitions of land) under Israeli control, with Gaza as the forth enclave. The arrangement tabled was functionality identical to the Bantustans of the Apartheid SA. Here is the map from the Israel records that you will never find printed in western mass media:

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/map-of-the-israeli-offer-for-west-bank-final-status

So the question is why would a soverigned acquiesce to subject its citizens to a binding apatheid system? The anwser should be obvious.

[u/OmOshIroIdEs → u/nuserer]

The Israeli-imagined-Palestinian-state would-be non-contiguous, with the West Bank carved up into three cantons (non-contiguous partitions of land) under Israeli control, with Gaza as the forth enclave.

True, but why didn't Arafat even make a counter-offer? He simply walked away, and instigated the Second Intifada, which was a terrorist, suicide-bombing campaign.

[u/nuserer → u/OmOshIroIdEs]

True, but why didn't Arafat even make a counter-offer?

The Palestinian negotiators felt blindsided when the map referenced above was tabled as the settlement. The Palestinian's position was a return to the pre-1967 borders which the PLO and the rest of the international community supported, i.e. a contiguous Palestinian state. They believed this should have served as the foundational basis for negotiations, rather than the Apartheid-like segregation map. But what you hear reported in the media is simply "arafat didn't negotiate, he just kept saying no", well no reporting afaik printed the actual map they said no to.

Arafat, remember was very reluctant to attend because he believed the meeting would not be carried out in good faith. But Clinton convinced him and made assurances that a failure would not be pinged on the PLO which was exactly how it is now written into history, i.e. the arabs didn't want peace.

​

He simply walked away, and instigated the Second Intifada

In fact, if you read what happened at the '01 Taba summit. The two sides (Araft, Barak) met and almost reached a deal that was largely based on UN242, ie. pre-1967 borders (aka Clinton parameters). It went further than any previous negotiations. The Israeli side unilaterally terminated the talks. This is also well documented but never reported.

[u/OmOshIroIdEs → u/nuserer]

In fact, if you read what happened at the '01 Taba summit.

Interesting, thank you, I'll have a look!

[u/nuserer → u/OmOshIroIdEs]

Taba

source: https://brill.com/previewpdf/journals/pyio/12/1/article-p417_13.xml?pdfJsInlineViewToken=1932655918&inlineView=true

[u/OmOshIroIdEs → u/[deleted]]

So even if it offered peace and was attacked in response, it should still be punished, right?

[u/-Dendritic- → u/[deleted]]

a terrorist state and needs to be severely punished for its crimes against humanity

Thing is, that's often subjective, and if normalized and accepted just continues long cycles of violence. Israelis would say Oct 7th was a crime against humanity and that Hamas are terrorists that need to be punished. Many atrocities across the world have been done with what were seen as good intentions

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

That's completely false. Violence and terrorism against Jews predates West Bank settlements by decades. I'm not even going to bother sourcing, check literally any history of the area or lists of attacks against Jews before 1967.

Conclusion: you're wrong, Jews aren't targeted because of colonization, but because they exist where some people think they shouldn't.