crapwittyname

Caribbean? I 'ardly know Ian!

Maybe if you had used it constructively instead, by, say, making any coherent point whatsoever? Then we wouldn't be here would we.

I haven't once argued in bad faith. You, on the other hand have essentially forbidden any criticism of Israel whatsoever, made no arguments except those where you attack me (hint: this is called an ad hominem fallacy) and continuously hand-waved without actually stooping so low as to tell me where I'm wrong; you just claim that I am but you can't be bothered to say why/how.
Bonus points for your "I know you are but what am I" on the subject of open-mindedness.
If this is you at your coolest, I guess if you were to actually lose your temper we'd just get an incoherent string of characters as repeatedly you smash your keyboard into your face to make a point.

Is this a joke account?

want to live in peace

Genocides their neighbours

Literally a lie.
Amnesty international.
The UN.
Pretty much every government in the world.

All liars.

My only wish is that Israelis would wake the fuck up and realize that trying to kill all of the Palestinians isn't a winning strategy. Sure, a lot of them don't harbor that sentiment, but enough of them do. I do not feel bad about the Nazis or Japanese Imperialists that were killed in WW2, and I don't feel bad for these idiots that won't give up Zionism to better their lives. All sides have to agree on peace, and as it stands, Zionists don't want that.

Ftfy

Bloody hell, yes. I missed that!

I'm not advocating for genocide, but....

Predictably goes on to unambiguously advocate for genocide

Friendly reminder that Palestine is an illegally occupied territory and it's near impossible to "improve your life" without first freeing yourself from oppression.

"This crap" being a rational take. It seems like you've made your mind up, and any contrary viewpoint be damned.
Side note: it's a bad faith argument to attach everyone to some arbitrary group, fail to define that group, and then attack it.

an attempt for me to state more concrete positions

It is exactly this. You attack "the left" and "liberals" as though they are the same thing (they very much are not) without mentioning anything specific, so it's hard for me (the left; not a liberal) to defend any position. I suspected a bunch of implied strawman fallacies was hidden behind this hand-waving and frankly I think this is a cowardly way to argue your point. So let's do the bullet points.

• "From the river to the sea" is not a blatant anything. Yes, it has been used by Hamas, but it has also been used by Likud, for basically the opposite meaning. Therefore context must be absolutely appropriate in the understanding of the intent of the words. If a person or group who are in favour of Palestinian sovereignty and/or a single-state solution use the phrase, you can quite fairly assume that they are talking about this issue, rather than calling for the extermination of an ethnic group. It's dishonest in the extreme to label anyone who calls for Palestinians to be free an antisemite. As for the other phrase you mentioned, it seems like you are saying anyone who mentions an intifada is antisemitic. That seems ridiculous, and possibly you need to give more context.

• Israel is an apartheid regime. It is a settler colonial project. It meets these definitions, and either you're for settler colonialism or you're against Israel in its current manifestation.

• The reason you've not heard about other states doing other things is because we are talking about Israel, and the ways in which Arabic people are opressed there. The mistreatment of Jewish people in other places at other times does not pardon or imply permission for the mistreatment of Arabs anywhere.

• It's not about being "progressive coded". It's context, again. If a group's aim is to restore human rights for people, and/or oversee equality then any accusation of racism should be considered with this context. Conversely, an organisation which has historically made horrific racist/homophobic statements should be considered differently in the same scenario. Again, it's hard to pinpoint exactly which groups and which incidents you are talking about, as you give no examples.

What sort of nuance and objectivity would you like to see from the huge portion of liberals you mentioned?

"The left" blames Hamas for the kidnapping and murder of these innocent Israeli hostages, because they're the ones who did it.
"The left" blames the Israeli government for the murder of 186,000 innocent Palestinian civilians, because they're the ones who did it.

Do you get it now?