it is obviously not a sfek-sfek-sfek…sfeika if the Zionists are violating the oaths. That’s silly. [katan]
—
you are misinterpreting what I said .
All I am dealing with ,is not the tsidkut or otherwise of the z.
We have to deal in a cold logical halachik way without emotions ,
about the continued EXISTENCE of the state ,
not about the z campaign under the british ,
not the establishment of the state ,
not about the wars that followed.
not about what the z could or should have done,
they are all history , and irrelevant
the question of the continued EXISTENCE of the state is intertwined with the pikuach nefesh of millions
and therefore extremely weighty
this question of the continued EXISTENCE of the state vs the pikuach nefesh concerns ,
is to be solved on the basis of PRESENT REALITY in 2025.
sidestepping this reality , automatically disqualifies you from any halachic logical input to deal with this problem
that would be the same as purposely ignoring the workings of a fridge and
then in the same breath claiming that you know whether its use is permitted on shabat.
—
Since the discussion is not about ‘history’ , rather about reality.
meaning the EXISTENCE of the state ,
it definitely is a sfek-sfek-sfek…sfeika
whether said EXISTENCE contravenes the oaths
.
.
.