Well we face a terminology difficulty here, the phrase "dismantling of the state entirely" is pretty vague. So are you asking if the entity the state of Israel should vanish, its borders be erased etc then that's certainly an option, it is what could have been but for the British.
But less dramatic is the impostion of sanctions as the enforcement of UN resolutions regarding the occupation. Israel could start with that but it will not nor will most Israelis support that either.
Israeli society itself is broken, Hajo Meyer has talked about this as have other notable Jews. Meyer said that Israeli society is brainwashed and see Palestinians as second class citizens, they approve of treating them differently, Palestinians are perceived as a potential existential threat to Jews and as long as that attitude persists nothing can improve.
Then call them false statement not an emotive term intended to suggest that claims are antisemtic.
Not at all, it is something that can be justified, I'll take this opportunity to do that here:
1a. Nazis believed Aryans were in some way superior to Jews.
1b. Many Israels believe Jews are in some way superior to Arabs.
2a. Zionism is predicated on Jews having a divine right to territory in Palestine.
2b. Nazis believed that Germany had a right to expand its borders for its people.
3a. Nazis used a national tragedy to justify their policies - the Versaiiles treaty.
3b. Zionists use a national tragedy to justify their policies - the Holocaust.
4a. Nazis believed that Jews were a dire threat to Germans, an enemy waiting to take over.
4b. Zionists believe that Arabs are a dire threat to Jews, an enemy seeking to take over.
I could go on, you get the picture, these are defensible claims and the similarity justifies my comparison I think.
It's a label, a term describing the state of Israel, a term defining it by the nature of the ideology that formed it. Zionism was a nationalist political movement even before WW1. We had the World Zionist Organization, Workers of Zion, Revisionist Zionsim and more.
So the primary political forces that produced the eventual state of Israel all used the term "Zion" it is indelibly stamped on the political forces that gave rise to the state and which still heavily influence the state.
But there's more to my use of the term, the meaning that you deny exists is simple, it is what has that political ideology, the various factions and forces over the past 100 years, what effects has it produced? Zionist Israel is a label that represents the nature of the political and societal system, the effects it has had on non-Jews, these effects are part of the "meaning" of the term Zionist Israel.
It's disingenuous to attempt to deny the term has validity, again it strikes me as an effort to distort reality.
No, I don't think I can agree to that. Would it be wrong to have referred to Germany as Nazi Germany in the 1930s? or Communist USSR in the 1920s? Why do you seek to airbrush out the fact that ideological beliefs called "Zionism" BY JEWS 100 years ago are so named? Why drop the term?
Calling the Nazis Nazis wasn't demonizing Germans was it? Calling apartheid apartheid in South Africa wasn't demonizing people was it?
Well that may be but the UN is the authority that defines international law, that's a fact and we either defined and respect that effort or we ignore it and watch the world descend into self destruction.
