(Ed) General Israel/Palestine discussion thread - Part 3

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by dudalb

Nonsense. What the poster you are replying to was saying that some people whose ultimate goal is the elimination of Israel are exploting the Suffering of the Palstinians to achieve their ends, Big Difference.
For once, at least try to take off the ideological blinders.

Once again, I continue to ask the Anti Zionist crowd what is going to happen to the Six Million Jews living in Israel if the "Zionist Entity" is eliminated. I have never gotten a good straight answer.

I wish I could see things from a pure black and white viewpoint that a great many people on both sides of this issue see things from. It would make it so much easier.

Well here you are assuming I have ideological blinders on, the very thing I was saying gets in the way of any discussion.

I did not see anything in trustbutverify's post that suggested said people who wanted to get rid of Israel were only 'some'. Rather the post suggested one couldn't believe anyone who was concerned about Palestinians was being honest.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle

What dodge to the question, the basic stance is that no one really cares about the palestinians and anyone who claims to do so is only really only motivated by antisemitism. That isn't a question it is a ad hominem.

Same stand I read in the post I replied to. It was not me or some imagined ideology.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by trustbutverify

Well there you go, attacking comments you wish I had made, instead of the ones I actually did. That sounds about right.

So far two of us read your post the same way.

How do you determine people who actually care about one of the most oppressed people on the planet?

[Mycroft]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

How do you determine people who actually care about one of the most oppressed people on the planet?

When their concern goes away the moment you suggest a solution to their suffering that doesn't screw Israel you have a pretty good idea they're not really motivated by concern for Palestinians.

[crescent]

Israel PM vows to annex West Bank settlements if re-elected

Quote:

What exactly did Netanyahu say?
He was asked during an interview on Israeli TV why he had not extended Israeli sovereignty to large settlements in the West Bank.

"You are asking whether we are moving on to the next stage - the answer is yes, we will move to the next stage," he said.

"I am going to extend [Israeli] sovereignty and I don't distinguish between settlement blocs and the isolated settlements."

If implemented, this would eventually probably destroy Israel's ability to remain a Jewish state. Annexing the isolated settlements would place too much permanent Israeli territory too widely distributed within the West Bank to ever allow a Palestinian state. It would be much closer to apartheid, with similar results in the long term.

That would be an unsustainable status quo. If they can't have two states, they will end up with one, and Jewish people would not be the majority very long.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Well there you go, kill any possible solution before it has a chance by projecting antisemitism onto anyone who says the Palestinians are suffering. That's sounds about right.

Palestinians are indeed suffering. But it's mostly self-inflicted.

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by Mycroft

When their concern goes away the moment you suggest a solution to their suffering that doesn't screw Israel you have a pretty good idea they're not really motivated by concern for Palestinians.

Yep because giving them rights and treating them as Israeli citizens in a single liberal democratic state is of course the destruction of Israel as the theocratic state it truly is behind the facade of being a liberal democracy. And supporting that facade is the most important thing one can do.

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by crescent

If implemented, this would eventually probably destroy Israel's ability to remain a Jewish state. Annexing the isolated settlements would place too much permanent Israeli territory too widely distributed within the West Bank to ever allow a Palestinian state. It would be much closer to apartheid, with similar results in the long term.

That would be an unsustainable status quo. If they can't have two states, they will end up with one, and Jewish people would not be the majority very long.

That has been the only answers for decades, they could't forcibly end all those settlements. But I am sure there are plans to ethnically cleanse the region.

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Palestinians are indeed suffering. But it's mostly self-inflicted.

Yep collective punishment is the way to govern all subject peoples, just ask Reinhard Heydrich. If only they would learn to accept their masters everything would go swimmingly.

[Belz...]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Palestinians are indeed suffering. But it's mostly self-inflicted.

In what say? Surely you're not suggesting that they should all pay for the actions a violent 'few', nor that their homes should be taken away for use by other people?

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by Belz...

In what say? Surely you're not suggesting that they should all pay for the actions a violent 'few', nor that their homes should be taken away for use by other people?

Of course that is what he is saying. Funny how much the right wing always loves war crimes.

[carlvs]

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle

That has been the only answers for decades, they could't forcibly end all those settlements. But I am sure there are plans to ethnically cleanse the region.

Don't worry, Netanyahu has already entered into an alliance with a group who exactly wants that ...

[Cosmic Yak]

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle

That has been the only answers for decades, they could't forcibly end all those settlements. But I am sure there are plans to ethnically cleanse the region.

There most certainly are. Have you read Hamas' original charter?

[Cosmic Yak]

Originally Posted by Belz...

In what say? Surely you're not suggesting that they should all pay for the actions a violent 'few', nor that their homes should be taken away for use by other people?

You mean in the way that all Jews are held responsible for the actions of an extremist few? Or how the Jews were treated in Iraq, Yemen, Egypt etc. in the years leading up to and after the foundation of the State of Israel?
Funny how this hardly ever gets talked about.

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak

There most certainly are. Have you read Hamas' original charter?

They are not the ones actually in any position to do such. But anything to excuse the indiscriminate killing of Muslims I guess.

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak

You mean in the way that all Jews are held responsible for the actions of an extremist few?

We are talking about the actions of the Israeli government if that is by definition an extremist few then clearly Israel is not a democracy.

Quote:

Or how the Jews were treated in Iraq, Yemen, Egypt etc. in the years leading up to and after the foundation of the State of Israel?
Funny how this hardly ever gets talked about.

It really does get talked about a lot, but really if pushing people out of their homes is fine with you why was those actions so bad, it seems like there is a bit of a double standard as to what happens when governments oppress their people.

[carlvs]

Originally Posted by carlvs

Don't worry, Netanyahu has already entered into an alliance with a group who exactly wants that ...

Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak

There most certainly are. Have you read Hamas' original charter?

Great, something that both sides agree on - the removal of the "other" from the region.

I recommend the immediate implementation of The Onion's solution to this (though it will have to expand to cover Gaza too) ...

Quote:

" As of press time, a torrential rain continues to fall on Israel and the West Bank, with the downpour expected to continue for another 39 days and 39 nights. Thus far, flood waters have risen more than 200 feet, drowning most of the humans and animals in the vicinity. The few remaining survivors, most of whom cling to pieces of driftwood, have made desperate pleas for mercy, but their cries have fallen on deaf ears in Heaven, with the Lord refusing to stem the raging waters.

"Though regretful over the severity of God's punishment, Mideast peace negotiators nonetheless praised Him for coming up with the first-ever viable solution to the ongoing crisis."
...

"For too long, thou hast ignored the entreaties of thy Lord to let go of your wickedness and hatred and live together in peace ... The time has come for that to stop. You want to keep running each other over with tanks and strapping dynamite to yourselves, killing women and children in pursuit of your extremist political positions, that's just fine. Let's see how well you carry out your murderous agendas under 800 feet of water."

[Belz...]

Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak

You mean in the way that all Jews are held responsible for the actions of an extremist few? Or how the Jews were treated in Iraq, Yemen, Egypt etc. in the years leading up to and after the foundation of the State of Israel?

Yes, exactly that way.

Or are you suggesting that Palestinians should be treated poorly for the actions of a few because the Jews often are? Two wrongs don't make a right.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by Belz...

In what say? Surely you're not suggesting that they should all pay for the actions a violent 'few'

Very little of what happens in the middle east has anything to do with "should". But there simply aren't good alternatives. For example, Israel has to restrict the movement of people and goods through the border between Israel and the occupied territories. That may hurt innocent Palestinians, but it's necessary because otherwise terrorists will attack Israelis on a regular basis. Those restrictions are the result of Palestinian actions.

I'm not particularly interested in debating whether Israel's policies are optimal. Almost nobody's are. But even if they were optimal, the Palestinians would still be suffering. Hamas and company will never stop waging war on Israel as long as they exist, and there's no possible way that Israel can really treat the Palestinians the way they want to be treated under those conditions.

Plus, of course, there's a lot of Palestinian-on-Palestinian violence as well.

[Belz...]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Very little of what happens in the middle east has anything to do with "should".

I'm asking you for your opinion on the matter.

Quote:

But there simply aren't good alternatives. For example, Israel has to restrict the movement of people and goods through the border between Israel and the occupied territories. That may hurt innocent Palestinians, but it's necessary because otherwise terrorists will attack Israelis on a regular basis. Those restrictions are the result of Palestinian actions.

I wonder if they should check for handedness as well. If most terrorists turn out to be right-handed, right-handed people would naturally suffer as a consequence. Sounds silly? Yes, yes it does.

Quote:

I'm not particularly interested in debating whether Israel's policies are optimal. Almost nobody's are. But even if they were optimal, the Palestinians would still be suffering. Hamas and company will never stop waging war on Israel as long as they exist, and there's no possible way that Israel can really treat the Palestinians the way they want to be treated under those conditions.

Would the two-state solution even help?

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by Belz...

I'm asking you for your opinion on the matter.

And my opinion is that "should" is rarely the right question on the topic.

Quote:

I wonder if they should check for handedness as well. If most terrorists turn out to be right-handed, right-handed people would naturally suffer as a consequence. Sounds silly? Yes, yes it does.

I assume you think this is a relevant analogy, but it isn't.

Quote:

Would the two-state solution even help?

Not as long as any Palestinian state was dedicated to the destruction of Israel. And as of now, if you formed a Palestinian state, that's what you would produce. Decades of indoctrination in hate have sown the wind.

[Belz...]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

And my opinion is that "should" is rarely the right question on the topic.

Maybe but I still wanted to know.

Quote:

I assume you think this is a relevant analogy, but it isn't.

Why not?

Quote:

Not as long as any Palestinian state was dedicated to the destruction of Israel. And as of now, if you formed a Palestinian state, that's what you would produce. Decades of indoctrination in hate have sown the wind.

Well at least then Israel could declare war. I suppose that would take us right back to where we are. So what's the solution, you think?

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by Belz...

Why not?

For starters, there's no reason to think that the probability of any individual being an anti-Israel terrorist depends on their handedness, but the probability of any individual being an anti-Israel terrorist does depend on whether they are Palestinian or not.

Quote:

Well at least then Israel could declare war. I suppose that would take us right back to where we are. So what's the solution, you think?

The only way I see the conflict ever ending is with unambiguous victory for one side and defeat for another.

Right now, the Palestinians don't think they've been defeated. They think that they can eventually win. And so they fight on, in the belief that eventually they'll wear Israel down. That hope has to be crushed. I'm not sure exactly what that will take. Unfortunately, I think it may take a lot of bloodshed, as was required to make Germany and Japan accept defeat in WW2. But the amount of bloodshed required to achieve peace through a Palestinian victory and an Israeli defeat is much larger, and would essentially constitute genocide.

But an Israeli victory isn't going to happen any time soon, because they balk at what would be required to do that. And not without reason: this simmering conflict may be the lesser evil compared to a war that would truly crush the Palestinians.

So the only alternative I can see is to try to get that message through by other means. And that's why I'm in favor of stuff like moving the US embassy to Jerusalem, declaring Israeli sovereignty over the Golan heights, and the reduction in US aid in response to payments to terrorists. These are non-violent means to send a message about who has won and who has lost. If we're lucky, maybe that message will eventually get through. I'm not optimistic that it will, but that's the only middle path I see between the festering status quo and massive conflict.

[Aridas]

Originally Posted by Belz...

In what say? Surely you're not suggesting that they should all pay for the actions a violent 'few', nor that their homes should be taken away for use by other people?

That depends on the specifics, honestly. There's a mixture of acceptable and unacceptable that Israel's engaged in which ends up muddying the waters. Closing a crossing for a day or two because of a terrorist attack there is something that ends up punishing a whole lot of unrelated people, but it's entirely reasonable and acceptable. Tightening laws in response to terrorist attacks to try to prevent attacks from repeating tends to be understandable and acceptable to a point, but... where the line is gets murky and people definitely end up punished for things that they, themselves, didn't do. Kicking Arabs out of their homes just to make room for Jews, on the other hand, obviously isn't acceptable.

Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak

There most certainly are. Have you read Hamas' original charter?

The PLO also started similarly. Quite a few of the Palestinian terrorist groups really want to ethnically cleanse the Jews.

Originally Posted by Belz...

Would the two-state solution even help?

There's potential, if both sides compromise and take significant steps to move forward peacefully. On the Palestinian side, for example, officially acknowledging Israel's right to exist and seriously acting to end and counter the significant and nasty anti-Jew propaganda are examples of quite necessary steps for them. For Israel's side, taking steps to actually offer reasonable equality to non-Jews and end the general oppression of non-Jews would definitely be a necessary pair of steps for long-term pleasant co-existence.

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Right now, the Palestinians don't think they've been defeated. They think that they can eventually win. And so they fight on, in the belief that eventually they'll wear Israel down.

This is also related to their attempts to largely refuse to accept that they are at an overwhelming disadvantage on the negotiating table due to the consequences of repeated overwhelming failures to win militarily against Israel. Each loss drastically weakened the cards they had to play and we're at a point where their leaders have long been unwilling to accept the consequences of just cutting their losses and taking what they can get from the terrible position that they've found themselves in.

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

But an Israeli victory isn't going to happen any time soon, because they balk at what would be required to do that. And not without reason: this simmering conflict may be the lesser evil compared to a war that would truly crush the Palestinians.

Rather, it almost certainly is the lesser evil, by far. The Palestinians are a very weak actual threat at present, after all. Lots of hostility, but nearly no ability to do much with it.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by Aridas

This is also related to their attempts to largely refuse to accept that they are at an overwhelming disadvantage on the negotiating table due to the consequences of repeated overwhelming failures to win militarily against Israel. Each loss drastically weakened the cards they had to play and we're at a point where their leaders have long been unwilling to accept the consequences of just cutting their losses and taking what they can get from the terrible position that they've found themselves in.

Oh, but it's NOT a terrible position. Not for their leadership, anyways. Do you know how rich Arafat was? They're making out like bandits, not coincidentally because they are bandits. The status quo suits them just fine.

[dudalb]

No clear winner in the elections. This puts the power in the hands of a few extremist groups.
RIght now Israel has replaced Italy as being a excellent argument against the classic parliamentary form of government.

[Mycroft]

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle

Yep because giving them rights and treating them as Israeli citizens in a single liberal democratic state is of course the destruction of Israel as the theocratic state it truly is behind the facade of being a liberal democracy. And supporting that facade is the most important thing one can do.

To my knowledge the Palestinians have never asked to be integrated into Israel. Peace talks have always been towards creating an independent separate state.

[applecorped]

Originally Posted by dudalb

No clear winner in the elections. This puts the power in the hands of a few extremist groups.
RIght now Israel has replaced Italy as being a excellent argument against the classic parliamentary form of government.

Clear winner. Bibi.

[dudalb]

Bibi back in again. If he goes ahead with his annexatations plans,hell is going to break lose in the Mideast.
I am beginning to think the Israeli Parliamentary system is broken beyond repair./

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by dudalb

If he goes ahead with his annexatations plans,hell is going to break lose in the Mideast.

How would that be any different?

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

How would that be any different?

If you don't think things can get a LOT worse in the Middle East, you are pretty damn ignorant...or a blind Trump supporter. Of course the two seem to be synonymous.
You right wingers will probably get your major war with the Islamic world. Hope you are happy when the body bags start coming home.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by dudalb

If you don't think things can get a LOT worse in the Middle East, you are pretty damn ignorant...or a blind Trump supporter. Of course the two seem to be synonymous.
You right wingers will probably get your major war with the Islamic world. Hope you are happy when the body bags start coming home.

Wow. That's a bit of an overreaction to a sarcastic dig at the standard state of affairs in the middle east.

And yeah, I know it can get worse. For example, Iran could get nukes. Imagine how terrible a president would have to be in order to give Iran a billion dollars to help make that happen.

[Cosmic Yak]

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle

They are not the ones actually in any position to do such. But anything to excuse the indiscriminate killing of Muslims I guess.

Whether or not Hamas has the means to carry out their plans is irrelevant to their stated intent to do so. Nor does it excuse it.

As for your second sentence, it is typical- and sadly so- of this kind of debate. When there is this degree of polarisation, one is automatically placed in one camp or the other, depending on which side they criticise first.
If you knew anything about me, if you had read any of my other posts elsewhere on this forum or if you had refrained from colouring in those gaps with your own blinkered views, you would not have made such a statement.

Let me make my position clear, so you do not make this error again: I believe there is right and wrong on both sides. I am as critical of Israel as I am of the Palestinian Arabs. This may result in my criticising the latter more often, simply because the amount of untruths and abuse levelled at the Israelis is far greater than that levelled at the Palestinian Arabs.
Regarding specifics: I support a two-state solution, the settlements must go, Hamas and Islamic Jihad must renounce violence and accept the existence of Israel, and the largely spurious claims of the so-called 'right to return' should also end.

[Cosmic Yak]

Originally Posted by Belz...

Yes, exactly that way.

Or are you suggesting that Palestinians should be treated poorly for the actions of a few because the Jews often are? Two wrongs don't make a right.

Do please quote me as saying that I am supporting or excusing collective punishment.
It will not be an easy task, because I have said no such thing.
This is yet another example of polarised thinking, which bedevils this topic, and is one of the main reasons why no solution is yet in sight.
To be clear: I oppose collective punishment, be it against Muslims or against Jews. Quite how you got this so wrong is a puzzler.

[Belz...]

Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak

Do please quote me as saying that I am supporting or excusing collective punishment.
It will not be an easy task, because I have said no such thing.This is yet another example of polarised thinking, which bedevils this topic, and is one of the main reasons why no solution is yet in sight.
To be clear: I oppose collective punishment, be it against Muslims or against Jews. Quite how you got this so wrong is a puzzler.

You might notice that I was asking you whether that's what you were suggesting or not. That is a question, not an accusation. So you can calm down now.

So why did you bring up how the Jews were historically treated as a response to my post? What does that have to do with how the Palestinians are treated by them? Make a damned point.

[Border Reiver]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Wow. That's a bit of an overreaction to a sarcastic dig at the standard state of affairs in the middle east.

And yeah, I know it can get worse. For example, Iran could get nukes. Imagine how terrible a president would have to be in order to give Iran a billion dollars to help make that happen.

You mean the president that returned the money of a party to an agreement that resulted in the neutering of any nuclear weapons program MIGHT have had as a means of getting compliance? The one that was working with a number of other nation states to get said deal and to see that said deal was enforced?

[Cosmic Yak]

Originally Posted by Belz...

You might notice that I was asking you whether that's what you were suggesting or not. That is a question, not an accusation. So you can calm down now.

So why did you bring up how the Jews were historically treated as a response to my post? What does that have to do with how the Palestinians are treated by them? Make a damned point.

Quite simple, really. The prevailing tactic is to paint the Palestinian Arabs as victims, blameless and innocent, whilst portraying the Israelis and the Jews in general as the embodiment of genocidal evil.
Acknowledging that prejudice, leading to harmful and often fatal results, exists on both sides, would be a useful first step to defusing some of the hatred and tension, and opening a more reasonable dialogue.
This would apply both to those in the Middle East, and their respective supporters around the world.

[Belz...]

Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak

Quite simple, really. The prevailing tactic is to paint the Palestinian Arabs as victims, blameless and innocent, whilst portraying the Israelis and the Jews in general as the embodiment of genocidal evil.

Except that no one's done that. In fact, you know I haven't done that, since I mentioned in the post you first quoted that you shouldn't hurt the larger population based on the violent actions of a few. That implies that the actions of said few are violent. Hell, I even put "few" in scare quotes to indicate that there are actually quite a few of them.

[dudalb]

Saw that Israeli's company attempt to be the first private company to land a probe on the moon was a miserable failure.
It's Karma. That's what you get for relecting a turd like Bibi.....

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by Border Reiver

You mean the president that returned the money of a party to an agreement that resulted in the neutering of any nuclear weapons program MIGHT have had as a means of getting compliance? The one that was working with a number of other nation states to get said deal and to see that said deal was enforced?

Nothing is going to satisfy the right where Iran is concerned except "Regime Change".
And remember where that kind of thinking got us about 15 years ago.
But that is the thing about ideologues.They never learn. They are so emotionally commited to their ideology they cannot accept it might be mistaken.
I think it is clear the right in the US is pushing for a war with Iran, and, tragically, IMHO they will get it.And it will make Iraq look like a Sunday School picnic.