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

[webfusion]

Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak

My understanding is that the Palestinian Authority was invited, but refused to attend.

According to Saeb Erekat, the Palestinians did not get 'consulted' about the workshop.
https://www.france24.com/en/20190520...ain-conference

In any case, the billions of $$$ to assist Palestinians were discussed in the context of an overall "peace deal" and there is no chance of movement towards any such deal in the remainder of this year.

And the Palestinians are INCREASING their payments to terrorists.
https://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-C...-report-594600

[Cosmic Yak]

Originally Posted by webfusion

According to Saeb Erekat, the Palestinians did not get 'consulted' about the workshop.
https://www.france24.com/en/20190520...ain-conference

This may not be entirely true, or his remarks have been misquoted:
The PLO issued a formal statement rejecting their invitation to the conference:

Quote:

The Palestinian Authority on Wednesday formally rejected an invitation to a US-led peace conference in Bahrain next month, where Washington is expected to unveil the economic aspects of its long-awaited Middle East peace plan.

The meeting is planned for June 25-26 in the capital city of Manama. The PA had previously indicated that it would not participate in the event, but had not officially refused.

This announcement came 3 days after Erekat's statement. Makes me wonder what changed between those two statements.

[webfusion]

Bigfoot seen in Gaza.
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/N...ws.aspx/267640

[Michel H]

Massachusetts senator, presidential candidate and former professor at Harvard Law School Elizabeth Warren seems to have a good plan for peace.

She was asked:

Quote:

What are your concrete plans to address the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians?

She replied:

Quote:

... I believe that the way we respect all parties is through a two-state solution — an outcome that’s good for US interests, good for Israel’s security and its future, and good for Palestinian rights, dignity and self-determination. To achieve this, there must be an end to the Israeli occupation and the creation of an independent and sovereign Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip living alongside Israel.
...
Unfortunately, the Trump administration’s approach has made a two-state solution harder to achieve. His one-sided “peace plan” is a rubber stamp for annexation and offers no chance for a real Palestinian state. As president, I’ll take immediate steps to fix the damage and reestablish America’s role as a credible mediator.

I will welcome the Palestinian General Delegation back to Washington, because we cannot advance peace when we have closed our channels of communication. I will resume aid to the Palestinians that the Trump administration has cut off, and place greater emphasis on relieving the humanitarian catastrophe in the Gaza Strip, because we cannot sustain peace without a future that brings greater freedom, prosperity and security to the Palestinian people. I will reopen the US mission in Jerusalem to the Palestinians and make clear that in a two-state agreement both parties should be able to have their capitals in Jerusalem.

Today, the continued expansion of Israeli settlements and the increasing normalization of proposals for Israel to annex parts or all of the West Bank are the most immediate dangers to the two-state solution. These are policies that have been aggressively pursued by Benjamin Netanyahu and his allies, but also by successive Israeli governments for years. I oppose unilateral annexation in any form — and I will reverse any US policy that supports it. If Israel’s government continues with steps to annex the West Bank, the US should make clear that none of our aid should be used to support annexation. At the same time, I will also address anti-democratic practices and corruption within the Palestinian Authority that have fed a sense of disillusionment inside the Palestinian Territories. And we must unequivocally press all sides to refrain from violence or incitement to violence.

Link: https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/trum...plan-for-that/.

[Mycroft]

Or...maybe the United States shouldn't be proposing peace plans. We can be a mediator if both parties want us to be, but each new administration coming up with a new plan doesn't seem to have accomplished anything.

[trustbutverify]

Originally Posted by Michel H

Massachusetts senator, presidential candidate and former professor at Harvard Law School Elizabeth Warren seems to have a good plan for peace.

She was asked:

She replied:

Link: https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/trum...plan-for-that/.

I'm not quite convinced individuals such as yourself who assert the Holocaust was the result of international Jewry preventing Europe from appeasing Hitler enough, and who admire ISIS and other such moronic drivel should be taken seriously by rational people... Jewish or otherwise.

[Aridas]

Originally Posted by trustbutverify

I'm not quite convinced individuals such as yourself who assert the Holocaust was the result of international Jewry preventing Europe from appeasing Hitler enough, and who admire ISIS and other such moronic drivel should be taken seriously by rational people... Jewish or otherwise.

With that said... Warren is very competent and I think that she would have a far, far better chance of making progress than the current bad joke of an administration. After the Trump Presidency, though, it's hard to say how actually influential and meaningful the US' position even can be.

[trustbutverify]

Originally Posted by Aridas

With that said... Warren is very competent and I think that she would have a far, far better chance of making progress than the current bad joke of an administration. After the Trump Presidency, though, it's hard to say how actually influential and meaningful the US' position even can be.

I agree with you and Warren. But like the N word, it depends on who's saying it.

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by Mycroft

Or...maybe the United States shouldn't be proposing peace plans. We can be a mediator if both parties want us to be, but each new administration coming up with a new plan doesn't seem to have accomplished anything.

Pretty clear that the current administration has sort of thrown any status the US had as a honest broker .

[Michel H]

Originally Posted by trustbutverify

I'm not quite convinced individuals such as yourself who assert the Holocaust was the result of international Jewry preventing Europe from appeasing Hitler enough, and who admire ISIS and other such moronic drivel should be taken seriously by rational people... Jewish or otherwise.

I don't think I ever said such things.

However, I do think that the current lesson drawn from World War 2 (which is, roughly, that Adolf Hitler was very, very bad, and that the UK and US were the great heroes which saved Europe from Nazism), while not being completely wrong, is nevertheless very inaccurate and misleading, and leads to (mostly unpleasant) political phenomena like Donald Trump and his beliefs.

The UK and France did not really have to (illegally) declare war to Germany in 1939 (the French declaration of war was illegal because it was never voted by parliament, and therefore violated the constitution of the third republic of the time), the Allies did not have to demand unconditional surrender of Germany in January 1943, and they also did not have to massively bomb and invade Germany, and execute its (remaining) political and military leaders after fake one-sided trials. These policies had, of course, terrible (and mostly unfair) consequences for the Jews, because Hitler was (wrongly) convinced that the Jews were responsible for all his troubles.

After the persecutions during World War 2, the Jews got a new State (Israel), and I think that's a good thing, because it shows that the world has not forgotten.

Regarding ISIS, I don't "admire" it, but I believe it is a brutal resistance movement, which developed in Iraq because of the illegal invasion of Iraq by the US (and some other countries) in 2003, and because of excessive US support for Israel. Unfortunately, when you bomb and invade illegally another country, you usually don't encourage the most delicate and refined intellectuals in that country.

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by Michel H

I don't think I ever said such things.

However, I do think that the current lesson drawn from World War 2 (which is, roughly, that Adolf Hitler was very, very bad, and that the UK and US were the great heroes which saved Europe from Nazism), while not being completely wrong, is nevertheless very inaccurate and misleading, and leads to (mostly unpleasant) political phenomena like Donald Trump and his beliefs.

The UK and France did not really have to (illegally) declare war to Germany in 1939 (the French declaration of war was illegal because it was never voted by parliament, and therefore violated the constitution of the third republic of the time), the Allies did not have to demand unconditional surrender of Germany in January 1943, and they also did not have to massively bomb and invade Germany, and execute its (remaining) political and military leaders after fake one-sided trials. These policies had, of course, terrible (and mostly unfair) consequences for the Jews, because Hitler was (wrongly) convinced that the Jews were responsible for all his troubles.

After the persecutions during World War 2, the Jews got a new State (Israel), and I think that's a good thing, because it shows that the world has not forgotten.

Regarding ISIS, I don't "admire" it, but I believe it is a brutal resistance movement, which developed in Iraq because of the illegal invasion of Iraq by the US (and some other countries) in 2003, and because of excessive US support for Israel. Unfortunately, when you bomb and invade illegally another country, you usually don't encourage the most delicate and refined intellectuals in that country.

This is garbage.
A lot of it would not be out of place on an open Nazi Apologists website.
Still trying to figure out why the US and UK being proud of the part they played in briging down the Third Reich led to Donald Trump.
And how hell were the Allies going to defeat Nazi Germany without "Massively Invading " it.....

[Michel H]

Originally Posted by dudalb

Still trying to figure out why the US and UK being proud of the part they played in briging down the Third Reich led to Donald Trump.

Because Donald Trump, with his policies of persecution of Iran, the Palestinians, Venezuela, North Korea, Syria, ... and even Russia expresses American arrogance to a point of near-insanity. This would perhaps not have happened if the international community (including Germany and Japan) had been more lucid and more critical of the U.S., since World War 2. America, in spite of its (very real) power, has been like a spoilt child of the world in the last 75 years or so. That's how you put a madman in the White House. The way America views itself is influenced by the way other countries see it.

Quote:

And how hell were the Allies going to defeat Nazi Germany without "Massively Invading " it.....

They could, for example, have pushed back German armies to their pre-1939 borders, and bombed military targets only (if necessary). Or relied more on local resistance and protests in invaded countries, and negotiations.

It seems to me that this would have been more satisfactory, from an ethical point of view.

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by Michel H

Because Donald Trump, with his policies of persecution of Iran, the Palestinians, Venezuela, North Korea, Syria, ... and even Russia expresses American arrogance to a point of near-insanity. This would perhaps not have happened if the international community (including Germany and Japan) had been more lucid and more critical of the U.S., since World War 2. America, in spite of its (very real) power, has been like a spoilt child of the world in the last 75 years or so. That's how you put a madman in the White House. The way America views itself is influenced by the way other countries see it.

They could, for example, have pushed back German armies to their pre-1939 borders, and bombed military targets only (if necessary). Or relied more on local resistance and protests in invaded countries, and negotiations.

It seems to me that this would have been more satisfactory, from an ethical point of view.

God, that is ridiculous.

[trustbutverify]

Originally Posted by Michel H

I don't think I ever said such things.

You also don't think credible evidence is required to support your assertion that you have psychic powers, so forgive me for ignoring what you think...especially considering the fact that you did say such things.

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by trustbutverify

You also don't think credible evidence is required to support your assertion that you have psychic powers, so forgive me for ignoring what you think...especially considering the fact that you did say such things.

And he sure as hell does not know much about military history and strategy,as his suggestion for how the Allies could have 'Humanly " defeated Nazi Germany goes.

[MandelaSpinoza]

As the days pass and this continues to go on, Netanyahu's chances of forcing another round of elections and maintaining his role as interim PM improve.

[Michel H]

Originally Posted by MandelaSpinoza

As the days pass and this continues to go on, Netanyahu's chances of forcing another round of elections and maintaining his role as interim PM improve.

Yes, you may be right about this, even though it's a paradox, because Netanyahu is really a symbol of a "conquering Israel" (though there are some politicians, on the far right, who are even worse than him these days, it seems).

There are many smart people in Israel, but unfortunately few seem to understand that the policy of illegal occupation and settlement expansion isn't the right approach.

[Orphia Nay]

https://twitter.com/IDF/status/1392953390443991040?s=20


Israel Defense Forces
@IDF
·
3h
IDF air and ground troops are currently attacking in the Gaza Strip.

[Michel H]

Originally Posted by Orphia Nay

https://twitter.com/IDF/status/1392953390443991040?s=20


Israel Defense Forces
@IDF
·
3h
IDF air and ground troops are currently attacking in the Gaza Strip.

This was perhaps a slightly misleading tweet, in the sense that there is no ground offensive (yet):

Quote:

Army clarifies: Currently no IDF ground troops inside the Gaza Strip
(https://www.timesofisrael.com/livebl...he-gaza-strip/)

[Orphia Nay]

Originally Posted by Michel H

This was perhaps a slightly misleading tweet, in the sense that there is no ground offensive (yet):

Indeed. I was misled.

[Puppycow]

Check out this video:

Israel-Gaza: Strike collapses building during live BBC report

Amazing video. I really hope no civilians were killed. It seems the conflict has seriously escalated in recent days. I realize that this is in response to rocket attacks on Israel from Gaza.

[Puppycow]

What is going on between Israel and the Palestinians?

A longer video explaining what sparked the recent escalation of hostilities.

[Puppycow]

Originally Posted by Orphia Nay

https://twitter.com/IDF/status/1392953390443991040?s=20


Israel Defense Forces
@IDF
·
3h
IDF air and ground troops are currently attacking in the Gaza Strip.

Originally Posted by Michel H

This was perhaps a slightly misleading tweet, in the sense that there is no ground offensive (yet):

Originally Posted by Orphia Nay

Indeed. I was misled.

It was an intentional misdirection in order to fool Hamas into believing that a ground invasion was imminent:

https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/id...s-metro-668182

Quote:

According to reports, due to the deployment along the border and the news coming out in the foreign media of a ground incursion, Hamas and Islamic Jihad sent their first-line of defense into the tunnels to start taking up positions. These were the anti-tank missile teams and mortar squads meant to strike at incoming Israeli ground forces.

What these Hamas operatives did not know was that there was no ground offensive. Instead, once they were out of the tunnels, they were exposed to Israeli aircraft. Within minutes, the “Metro” attack went ahead. This led to speculation that the tweet about the ground incursion was intentional and made to get Hamas to believe it was safe to enter the tunnels.

[Garrison]

Originally Posted by Michel H

Yes, you may be right about this, even though it's a paradox, because Netanyahu is really a symbol of a "conquering Israel" (though there are some politicians, on the far right, who are even worse than him these days, it seems).

There are many smart people in Israel, but unfortunately few seem to understand that the policy of illegal occupation and settlement expansion isn't the right approach.

It's also depressing that this seems to be the limits of Israeli security policy. I mean how many times have we been through the semi-identical situation of Hamas rockets, Israeli airstrikes, until eventually either Hamas runs out of rockets or the IDF goes in on the ground and destroy their stockpiles? End result is that Hamas remains firmly in control and everyone picks up the pieces while they wait for the next round in 6/12/18 months.

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by Garrison

It's also depressing that this seems to be the limits of Israeli security policy. I mean how many times have we been through the semi-identical situation of Hamas rockets, Israeli airstrikes, until eventually either Hamas runs out of rockets or the IDF goes in on the ground and destroy their stockpiles? End result is that Hamas remains firmly in control and everyone picks up the pieces while they wait for the next round in 6/12/18 months.

Real problem is the Israeli policy on settlement in the West Bank, which is idiotic.

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by MandelaSpinoza

As the days pass and this continues to go on, Netanyahu's chances of forcing another round of elections and maintaining his role as interim PM improve.

Which might be the reason HAMAS did this. Bibi is the best thing that ever happened to them in terms of getting them support.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by Puppycow

Check out this video:

Israel-Gaza: Strike collapses building during live BBC report

Amazing video. I really hope no civilians were killed. It seems the conflict has seriously escalated in recent days. I realize that this is in response to rocket attacks on Israel from Gaza.

OMG, that was horrendous!

[SuburbanTurkey]

Quote:

Mob Violence Against Palestinians in Israel Is Fueled by Groups on WhatsApp
Jewish extremists have formed more than 100 new groups on the Facebook-owned encrypted messaging app in recent days to target attacks.

The episode was one of dozens across Israel that the authorities have linked to a surge of activity by Jewish extremists on WhatsApp, the encrypted messaging service owned by Facebook. Since violence between Israelis and Palestinians escalated last week, at least 100 new WhatsApp groups have been formed for the express purpose of committing violence against Palestinians, according to an analysis by The New York Times and FakeReporter, an Israeli watchdog group that studies misinformation.

The WhatsApp groups, with names like “The Jewish Guard” and “The Revenge Troops,” have added hundreds of new members a day over the past week, according to The Times’s analysis. The groups, which are in Hebrew, have also been featured on email lists and online message boards used by far-right extremists in Israel.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/19/t...e=articleShare

[Michel H]

Quote:

Iranian Speaker Asks for Muslims’ Efforts to Uproot Israeli "Tumor"

Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf called on the Muslim states to increase efforts and unity to uproot the Zionist regime which is like a "cancerous tumor" in the region.

(https://www.farsnews.ir/en/news/1400...9CTmr%E2%80%9D)

It seems to me this kind of discourse is excessive and dangerous. It's not a good idea to fight to try to destroy Israel, this is not a good cause, and it is also a waste of time.

In my opinion, all Muslim nations should recognize Israel within the 1967 borders, and should apply moderate but significant pressure (through import and export taxes for example) to convince Israel to go back to its legal borders.

[Lukraak_Sisser]

As I said in the other thread.
Both sides have dirty hands.
Both sides have reasons to hate each other.
Both sides see themselves as the victims
Both sides think God is on their side.

This conflict is not going away.

[SuburbanTurkey]

Quote:

General Strike Highlights Israel's Dependency on Palestinian Workers
The Israel Builders Association said the strike over the situation in Gaza, Jerusalem and in mixed cities across Israel paralyzed building sites, causing estimated losses of nearly $40 million

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/...medium=twitter

Apartheid state is reliant on permanent underclass to function, who'd a thunk it?

[Graham2001]

Courtesy of the BBC...


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57145232

Quote:

On Sunday a video was posted on social media appearing to show a convoy of cars with Palestinian flags driving down a street, with a man apparently shouting anti-Semitic abuse from a megaphone.




The Met Police said the video appeared to have been filmed in the St John's Wood area of north London, which is home to a Jewish community.




Four men have been arrested on suspicion of racially aggravated public order offences, the force said.

[webfusion]

Originally Posted by Michel H

(https://www.farsnews.ir/en/news/1400...9CTmr%E2%80%9D)

It seems to me this kind of discourse is excessive and dangerous. It's not a good idea to fight to try to destroy Israel, this is not a good cause, and it is also a waste of time.

In my opinion, all Muslim nations should recognize Israel within the 1967 borders, and should apply moderate but significant pressure (through import and export taxes for example) to convince Israel to go back to its legal borders.

Point of reference:
Prior to June 1967, Israel did not have 'legal borders' --- the land area of "Israel" in 1967 was only demarcated by military cease-fire Agreements from 1949 (known collectively as Rhodes Armistices).

In those Agreements, the idea of "borders" was specifically rejected as being an element of the areas defined within the documents.

https://mfa.gov.il/mfa/foreignpolicy...agreement.aspx

[Michel H]

Originally Posted by webfusion

Point of reference:
Prior to June 1967, Israel did not have 'legal borders' --- the land area of "Israel" in 1967 was only demarcated by military cease-fire Agreements from 1949 (known collectively as Rhodes Armistices).

In those Agreements, the idea of "borders" was specifically rejected as being an element of the areas defined within the documents.

https://mfa.gov.il/mfa/foreignpolicy...agreement.aspx

It is true that there are currently no (very) clear, legally well defined borders for the state of Israel.

However, it seems that the (pre-)1967 border or 1949 "Green Line" is implicitly recognized by the United Nations as the official border of Israel, recognized by most of the international community.

The French wikipedia writes, in its article "Borders of Israel":

Quote:

Les frontières internationalement reconnues telles que lors de son admission à l'ONU sont celles dites « de 1967 » et suivent la ligne verte, c'est-à-dire les lignes d'armistice de la guerre israélo-arabe de 1948.

or

Quote:

The internationally recognized borders of Israel, valid when it was admitted to the United Nations, are the so-called "1967" ones, and follow the armistice lines of the 1948 Arab-Israeli war

(Link: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fronti...%27Isra%C3%ABl )

United Nations Security Council resolution 2334 (December 2016) says:

Quote:

- Condemning all measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, including, inter alia, the construction and expansion of settlements, transfer of Israeli settlers, confiscation of land, demolition of homes and displacement of Palestinian civilians, in violation of international humanitarian law and relevant resolutions,

- Expressing grave concern that continuing Israeli settlement activities are
dangerously imperilling the viability of the two-State solution based on the 1967 lines,

(https://www.un.org/webcast/pdfs/SRES2334-2016.pdf )

This is a way of telling implicitly that the 1967 line is the internationally recognized (or, at least, "desired") border of Israel.

The Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs (that you quote) itself explains (see https://mfa.gov.il/mfa/foreignpolicy...20general.aspx ):

Quote:

Admission of Israel to the United Nations, General Assembly Resolution 273 (III), 11 May 1949:


In the fall of 1948, Israel had applied for membership in the United Nations but failed to win the necessary majority in the Security Council. In the spring of 1949, the application was renewed. This time, armistice agreements having been signed between Israel and Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon, Israel was admitted by 37 votes in favour, 12 against, with 9 abstentions.

In other words, Israel was admitted only because it had accepted (together with its Arab neighbours) the 1949 border (even though it was viewed at the time as the a "demarcation line", see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Line_(Israel), but there no big difference between a demarcation line and a border). This might be viewed as a U.N. approval of the 1949 Green Line.

It seems clear to me (and we are not yet seeing the end of this conflict) that Arabs and Israelis, who are constantly fighting, need to be told by the international community, not just what their legal border is not, but actually what their legal border is.

[Planigale]

Originally Posted by Michel H

(https://www.farsnews.ir/en/news/1400...9CTmr%E2%80%9D)

It seems to me this kind of discourse is excessive and dangerous. It's not a good idea to fight to try to destroy Israel, this is not a good cause, and it is also a waste of time.

In my opinion, all Muslim nations should recognize Israel within the 1967 borders, and should apply moderate but significant pressure (through import and export taxes for example) to convince Israel to go back to its legal borders.

What appears to have been actually said;

Quote:

Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf called on the Muslim states to increase efforts and unity to uproot the Zionist regime which is like a "cancerous tumor" in the region.

This says nothing about destroying Israel. This is a bit like the US attitude towards e.g. Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Syria, etc. In fact probably a little more polite than many US politicians rhetoric about the regimes in control of these countries. One could argue whether the current Israeli government is a 'Zionist regime', but it does not seem an extreme description, Likud would be regarded as a zionist party and is the dominant party in the current Israeli government. A change from the current zionist regime is probably necessary for a successful peace process.

[Michel H]

Originally Posted by Planigale

One could argue whether the current Israeli government is a 'Zionist regime', but it does not seem an extreme description, Likud would be regarded as a zionist party and is the dominant party in the current Israeli government. A change from the current zionist regime is probably necessary for a successful peace process.

Yes, right.

But keep in mind that

Quote:

After the 1979 Islamic Revolution, Iran severed all diplomatic and commercial ties with Israel, and its theocratic government does not recognize the legitimacy of Israel as a state.

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E...as%20a%20state. ).

Iran would probably be ready to destroy the state of Israel, if they had the power and the opportunity.

It may also be of some interest to note that the Hamas rockets that have been falling on Israeli homes and cities in recent days have been developed with essential assistance from Iran. When you do such "serious" things, I think it is better to have decent political goals.

I just quoted the Fars News Agency (without changing a word, you can check via the link).

[Planigale]

Originally Posted by Michel H

Yes, right.

But keep in mind that

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E...as%20a%20state. ).

Iran would probably be ready to destroy the state of Israel, if they had the power and the opportunity.

It may also be of some interest to note that the Hamas rockets that have been falling on Israeli homes and cities in recent days have been developed with essential assistance from Iran. When you do such "serious" things, I think it is better to have decent political goals.

I just quoted the Fars News Agency (without changing a word, you can check via the link).

The UN does not recognise the current legitimacy of Israel within the borders claimed by Israel. There is difference between opposing the legitimacy of a state (as in the Apartheid state of south Africa, or the Islamist state of Iran, or the Socialist state of Cuba, all of which the US opposed), and your implication that Iran wants to kill the people within the borders of the state. There is a legitimate political debate about the legitimiacy of a by definition racist and theocratic state in Israel (as opposed to a genuinely egalitarian state).

IIt may also be of some interest to note that the Israeli rockets and shells that have been falling on Palestinian homes and refugee camps in recent days have been developed with essential assistance from US. When you do such "serious" things, I think it is better to have decent political goals.

I do not think 'decent' political goals are imprisoning a whole population, displacing them from their homeland, blowing up their homes, expelling them from their land. But that is a personal opinion. I entirely accept that you think killing Arab children, making Arab families homeless, depriving them of livelihoods is a decent political goal. But that is your opinion. I disagree with you.

[Michel H]

Originally Posted by Planigale

I entirely accept that you think killing Arab children, making Arab families homeless, depriving them of livelihoods is a decent political goal. But that is your opinion. I disagree with you.

No, I don't think such a thing is a decent political goal. I believe Israel is 80% responsible for the current crisis in Arab-Israeli relations, because of their occupation of territories policies, but even a stated goal of destroying the state of Israel (without necessarily trying to kill all Jews) is also not a good political goal, in my opinion (that's what Iran is trying to do and, by the way, Iran has a Jewish minority which doesn't seem to be complaining).

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by Michel H

No, I don't think such a thing is a decent political goal. I believe Israel is 80% responsible for the current crisis in Arab-Israeli relations, because of their occupation of territories policies, but even a stated goal of destroying the state of Israel (without necessarily trying to kill all Jews) is also not a good political goal, in my opinion (that's what Iran is trying to do and, by the way, Iran has a Jewish minority which doesn't seem to be complaining).

That's hilarious. Do you think for a second that it would be remotely safe for Iranian Jews to complain?

[Michel H]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

That's hilarious. Do you think for a second that it would be remotely safe for Iranian Jews to complain?

In Iran (which is not a fully democratic state), it is probably better to not complain too much, but this doesn't mean there is no freedom of expression at all there. You might think the situation of the Jews in Iran might be particularly difficult and painful, but that doesn't seem to be the case:

Quote:

Iran’s Jewish community is the largest in the Mideast outside Israel – and feels safe and respected
In a nation that has called for Israel to be wiped off the face of the Earth, the Iranian government allows thousands of Jews to worship in peace and continue their association with the country founded more than 2,500 years ago.
Kim Hjelmgaard, USA TODAY

(https://eu.usatoday.com/in-depth/new...ate/886790002/)