[frollogaston]

One reasonable possibility is they're referring to people like Ben-Gvir who have themselves claimed that Zionism means fighting for Israeli control over more territory like the West Bank. They're the ones calling the shots right now. I don't know whether Zionists 78 years ago would've agreed, it's possible.

To some it still means favoring any existence of a Jewish state. The inertia isn't there because aside from the original partition plan being pushed by the UK, other countries have attacked Israel several times later in ways they would've have withstood without outside support.

[FireBeyond]

Let's not forget that while some people like to point to "From the River (Jordan) to the (Red) Sea" as some "gotcha!" that some Palestians want to "exterminate" Israel...

it was actually Likud's official election slogan in the 70s and 80s just as ... oh, let me check, Netanyahu, was getting involved in all of this, formally becoming Likud's leader in 1993.

[UltraSane]

"Zionism means fighting for Israeli control over more territory like the West Bank."

Now that is a valid use of the term. I think the problem it that Zionism means so many different things it is nearly useless as a description. It seems more useful as a slur which has become very common in some circles.

"The inertia isn't there"

I'm not sure what you mean. Are you saying Israel could be defeated without US assistance?

[frollogaston]

I think it's valid to use the word the way that Israel's present leadership is using it.

> Are you saying Israel could be defeated without US assistance?

US and UK, yes. Not just cause of the weapons and money to Israel. After them, the top recipients of US foreign aid in the area are the bordering countries Egypt and Jordan, so that they don't attack.

[UltraSane]

> I think it's valid to use the word the way that Israel's present leadership is using it.

And how is that?

Israel has a population of 10 million people and a very modern military and nuclear weapons. If it's existence was ever truly threatened things would get VERY ugly.

[frollogaston]

Because that's what matters. The original Zionists aren't alive to ask what they think. Self-proclaimed Zionists are taking the West Bank and Gaza. In fact they've been kinda doing it for decades under previous governments, but more slowly. If there's some other kind of Zionism around, the most it's doing is complaining, and it's been outvoted.

I have doubts about their ability to self-defend because otherwise we wouldn't be giving so much money, the situation would be stable. Even if they can severely hurt the attackers, it doesn't really matter if the attackers stop at nothing. We just lost a war against Iran despite having full air superiority and killing their leader. And especially if you're considering the scenario where Israel never got Western support, and thus never got those advanced weapons.

[UltraSane]

Israel actually LEFT Gaza. You seem biased to the point of just plain lying.

[frollogaston]

West Bank and Gaza are different situations. West Bank settlements have been popping up continuously. Settlers were in Gaza until they exited in 2005, but now that Israel's military occupies it again, Zionists believe it should be resettled. Sorry for CNN link, but it has direct quotes https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/17/middleeast/israel-far-right-g... To be clear they haven't done it yet, aside from some illegal (by Israeli law) attempts, but they're trying.

It's pretty obvious from the emotional response that you've got some kind of horse in the Israel-Hamas war that I don't, which is fine, but I'm not gonna get called a liar too. So bye.

[tovej]

They did not. They're still occupying a buffer zone, have broken the ceasefire countless times, and are blocking people from crossing.

Israel razed Gaza to the ground. It was a genocide.