Well now they aren't giving it up. The problem is when you say that Israel should give the Golan Heights back to Syria, Zionist say that they already tried to give it back, but Assad wouldn't have it. That's why I want to know the contents of the "deal" or whatever it was.
Okay arguing about the ideal settlement for the conflict is a different matter. The PLA is shit but they represent the Palestinians, and they back a two state solution. A 2SS is the international consensus on the issue, so every time that the PLA reject a "peace offer" that guarantees a 2SS, it makes it seem like the Palestinians aren't interested in finding a solution to the conflict. And Palestine would be legitimized in a conflict with Israel since they would be considered a state defending itself whenever Israel lauches another attack.
I'm looking for Great Leap Forward stuff in particular, I can easily debunk Gorillions claims for the Soviet famine of 1932-3 but I don't know as much about the GLF. I usually cite the official CPC figure of 15 million, which is credible because it was used by Deng's faction to vilify the Maoists.
Isaac Ward
Actually ignore that last sentence it has nothing to do with the optics of the PLA rejecting a 2SS and its a dumb point
Adrian Baker
Yeah can't find anything on Syria giving it back.
Got any links on the Soviet famine?
Xavier Perry
Bud I'm talking about Israel handing back the Golan Heights to Syria. Syria has nothing to give back to Israel lmao. Hopefully that was just a mistype, because Israel trying to give up the Golan Heights was a very real thing at one ppint. This article (nytimes.com/2012/10/13/world/middleeast/secret-israel-syria-peace-talks-involved-golan-heights-exit.html) was the only one I can find about it, but it doesn't list 2008 as the year that the offer was given. It seems to suggest that Israel's deal was supposed to break up the Hezbollah-Iran-Syria match up in 2010, but the whole thing fell out after the Arab Spring. I guess that answers that question…
I'm still interested in those other 2 agreements with the Palestinians that fell out though.
I would like to use this thread to say something that I feel is important.
I am bisexual and at times I have weird feelings that from research can probably be classified as "gender fluid" but only sjw radlibs who probably aren't even actually gay or questioning their gender use that term so I don't say it cuz I don't want to be associated with them and I have gay relatives who I love, but I think the argument that Communist Parties such as the KKP shouldn't be supported because they still have traces of the homophobia which plagued much of the Old Left is fucking retarded.
In my opinion if a Communist Party is for building socialism as the economic base of society they should be supported and we can quibble about the social values after they are in power. "B-b-but Stalin gulagged a million gays!" I literally don't care, it's the 21st century and any Marxist Leninist parry that gains power probably knows somewhere that any antiquated positions they still have regarding LGBT shit will have to change eventually even if they currently maintain said positions to keep the part of their base that is old hetero guys from the Kruschev era or whatever.
I would much rather have a party which is committed to building socialism be in power and have to struggle through a period of cultural reform than have a woke neoliberal government that topples the economy over and over and virtue signals towards gays and minorities while doing it thus attracting the more heteronormative sections of the working class towards fascism that, once in charge will kill way more of us than any communist party ever would
Mason Campbell
Who even claims Stalin killed 60 million people anymore? It's literally impossible to kill that many people in a few years during peacetime.
