When the Israelites genocided the Caananites, the western Christian powers didn't exist and wouldn't exist for over a thousand years. This was the original hatred. The Bible doesn't even attempt to present the Caananites as the original aggressor. The Israelites made no attempt to negotiate with the Caananites, no attempt to share the land. They didn't even provide reservations for the Caananites, like the European Christians did when they settled in North America. This was the original hatred, the hatred of the Israelites (and their successors the Jews) for the Gentiles in general and the Caananites in particular.
Nor was this just some historical memory. Josiah attempted to repeat the genocidal expansionism four centuries later. Rather than apologising and feeling shame for the evil that their religious forbears committed, religious Jews celebrate Joshua and Josiah as heroes. Judaism is a religion of imperialism. It is a religion of expansionism. It is a religion of racism. It is a religion of genocide. You can't blow me off with your Cultural Marxist "imperialist" gas lighting. I as I said had the Jewish scriptures rammed down my throat as a child in the form of the Old Testament. I know what's in them.
Jewish supremacists and their Cultural Marxists running dogs (in this regard), try and make out the Jews to be some special victims of Roman Imperialism. The Romans were imperialists no one denies that. No I don't forgive or forget what the Romans did to my Germanic and Celtic ancestors. But the irony is that it was Canaanite, Phoenician Carthage that was wiped off the map not Judea.
You're being *defensive* about 'Cultural Marxist imperialist gas lighting', but then you *acknowledge* imperialism, as in Roman imperialism. These are *contradictory* positions.
Also, regarding ancient Judea:
See also: Judea (Roman province)
Judea lost its independence to the Romans in the 1st century BCE, by becoming first a tributary kingdom, then a province, of the Roman Empire. The Romans had allied themselves to the Maccabees and interfered again in 63 BCE, at the end of the Third Mithridatic War, when the proconsul Pompeius Magnus ("Pompey the Great") stayed behind to make the area secure for Rome, including his siege of Jerusalem in 63 BCE. Queen Alexandra Salome had recently died, and a civil war broke out between her sons, Hyrcanus II and Aristobulus II. Pompeius restored Hyrcanus but political rule passed to the Herodian family who ruled as client kings. In 6 CE, Judea came under direct Roman rule as the southern part of the province of Iudaea, although Jews living in the province still maintained some form of independence and could judge offenders by their own laws, including capital offences, until c. 28 CE. The Province of Judea, during the late Hellenistic period and early Roman period was also divided into five conclaves: Jerusalem (ירושלם), Gadara (גדרה), Amathus (עמתו), Jericho (יריחו), and Sepphoris (צפורין), and during the Roman period had eleven administrative districts (toparchies): Jerusalem, Gophna, Akrabatta, Thamna, Lydda, Ammaus, Pella, Idumaea, Engaddi, Herodeion, and Jericho. Eventually, the Jewish population rose against Roman rule in 66 CE in a revolt that was unsuccessful. Jerusalem was besieged in 70 CE and much of the population was killed or enslaved.
It was Canaanite, Phoenician Carthage that was burned to the ground and its fields salted, not Jerusalem.
Yes, Judea / Jerusalem was *also* victimized by Roman imperialism, as noted in the history above.
History can not be redone, but those of us that are genuinely anti imperialist as opposed to the fake anti imperialism of the Marxists, support Phoenician nationalism. Support the right of the Phoenician people to their own historic homeland. This latest blast, what ever its proximate cause, surely proves that Phoenicians deserve a State of their own.
What you're talking about happened over 2000 years ago and is not relevant today. There are modern Arab nations in the region that you're talking about.
Also there's no good reason for you to disparage Marxist anti-imperialism in the present day.
I'm an anti fascist. I support Indian independence. I support the Indian Hindu (and Sikh and Buddhist) struggle against Muslim and Han expansionist imperialism. I oppose both the Black fascism of Hitler and Mussolini and the Red fascism of Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, Mao and Ho Chi Ming.
No, you're not -- your politics more resemble that of Christian crusaders around 1100 CE.
You prefer Hindu supremacism (BJP) over Muslim human rights, including the Rohingya Muslims.
I don't see the Han / China as being *expansionist*, but feel free to provide any sources you may have. It sounds like anti-*China* sentiment on your part.
There's no such thing as 'Black fascism', because people of color have historically been *oppressed* and disempowered as a result of Western imperialism. Black people have no black-identity state power with which to subjugate others.
Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, Mao, and Ho Chi Minh were *not* fascists, but they *were* authoritarian (Stalinists), which is approrpriate for their politics of anti-imperialism against the Western imperialists.
Ideologies & Operations -- Fundamentals
Political Spectrum, Simplified