| ▲ | UltraSane 6 months ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Labeling arguments as 'hasbara' is just a way to avoid addressing the historical facts I've presented. Do you dispute that Jews legally purchased land during the Ottoman period? Do you dispute that the 1947 UN partition was rejected by Arab leadership? Do you dispute that five Arab armies invaded in 1948? Which specific historical claim do you think is incorrect? Using "hasbara" as a dismissal tactic is essentially admitting you can't refute my factual claims on their merits. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | Hikikomori 6 months ago | parent [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
I don't. But I don't find them particularly relevant to the situation in Gaza and the continued colonization/land stealing in the west bank. For example, you recognize the fledgling UN's decision to partition the land but don't recognize any decision they've taken since, not like you're following those borders anyway. I can all it Israeli state propaganda talking points if you want, hasbara is less of a mouthful though. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||