Human Rights Watch report accuses Israel of crimes against humanity, apartheid.

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser

I recall a very old interview with Golda Meir, who defended the actions of Israel by reminiscing how one of her first memories was a pogrom against the Jewish quarter and how these actions will make sure this never would happen to Jews again if they had their safe nation.

I remember thinking that now children in the occupied sections will grow up whose first memories are Israeli raids against their village to clear it for settlers or in a revenge strike.

Yea but no one is supposed to care about them as people.

[JoeMorgue]

Well that's the problem.

What do you do when you can't end a conflict because ending the conflict means one or both sides will not pay for their sins to everyone's satisfaction?

[Michel H]

Originally Posted by Meadmaker

I just find this to be an incredibly naive statement.


I wish you were right. In a sane world, it would be that simple, because people would care about having a job and being able to buy food and meet the opposite sex (or the same sex, if you prefer) instead of whose ancestors were killed where, and whether you say God or Adonnai or Allah and what He told whoever as recorded in some book.


But I can't look at your surprisingly simple solution and see how it fits with the wars of 1948, 1956, 1967, or 1973, with Scud missiles in Tel Aviv in 1991, with various militias and pseudogovernments in Lebanon, with pledges to destroy Israel no matter how long it takes from militias, from Arab states, from Iran.

No, it's not naive, it's just the (international) law.

The Arab-Israeli conflict has been (mostly) solved in 1967, by United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...Resolution_242):

Quote:

Operative Paragraph One "Affirms that the fulfillment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:

(i) Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;
(ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force."

Unfortunately, the U.S. has wanted to impose its own policy, more favorable to Israel, and this has blocked any solution since (since the U.S. is, of course, a very powerful state).

[Meadmaker]

Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser

I recall a very old interview with Golda Meir, who defended the actions of Israel by reminiscing how one of her first memories was a pogrom against the Jewish quarter and how these actions will make sure this never would happen to Jews again if they had their safe nation.

I remember thinking that now children in the occupied sections will grow up whose first memories are Israeli raids against their village to clear it for settlers or in a revenge strike.

Hate breeds hate, and both sides have been breeding it for 4 generations now.

There will never be a solution. Just more violence.

Indeed. I think as long as people think there is a substantive difference between US and THEM, they will fight. The only real solution to the fight between Jews and Palestinians is to develop a significant number of people who live in that part of the world, but see themselves as neither. Or at the very least see the distinction as insignificant.

I don't see how that happens.

[Meadmaker]

Originally Posted by Michel H

No, it's not naive, it's just the (international) law.
.

False dichotomy.

[Michel H]

Originally Posted by Meadmaker

False dichotomy.

I hope you are not suggesting that ambassadors to the United Nations are very naive and deluded individuals.

[Garrison]

Originally Posted by lomiller

Moderates willing to negotiate with Israel would never win an election and would be targeted and eliminated by other more extreme factions.

Well certainly at this point in time, but you can't absolve certain factions in Israeli politics for helping to lay the ground work for extremism to take root.

[Meadmaker]

Originally Posted by Michel H

I hope you are not suggesting that ambassadors to the United Nations are very naive and deluded individuals.

Many of them are. Yes. As have been diplomats elsewhere throughout history.


But I hadn't taken a look at 242 in quite some time, probably not since the dawn of the internet age. It isn't talked about as much today as it used to be.

I think the Wikipedia article on 242 is an interesting read. I don't think it's as simple as "The Arab-Israeli conflict has been (mostly) solved in 1967, by United Nations Security Council Resolution 242".

[lomiller]

Originally Posted by Garrison

Well certainly at this point in time, but you can't absolve certain factions in Israeli politics for helping to lay the ground work for extremism to take root.

Palestinian extremism has persisted regardless of what faction controls Israel and what concessions they are willing to make.

[Belz...]

Originally Posted by lomiller

Palestinian extremism has persisted regardless of what faction controls Israel and what concessions they are willing to make.

And the solution is of course to bomb hospitals.

[Meadmaker]

Further thought on 242.

Here's what Michel posted.

Quote:

(i) Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;
(ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force."

Here is how I think most supporters of Israel would post it:

Quote:

(i) Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;
(ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force."

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by Michel H

the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:

(i) Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;

I think a just peace would consist of Israel's neighbors giving up their claims to territories they lost in a war they started.

And the only reason there's not a lasting peace right now is because Israel's neighbors don't want one. In other words, this peace plan is just extortion.

[Michel H]

Originally Posted by Meadmaker

Further thought on 242.

Here's what Michel posted.



Here is how I think most supporters of Israel would post it:

The second part (and respect for Israel's right to exist as a state) is actually important too.

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by Garrison

Well certainly at this point in time, but you can't absolve certain factions in Israeli politics for helping to lay the ground work for extremism to take root.

You can say that about both sides.
Hamas and Bibi, frankly, are a godsend to each other.
I don't know what the solution is but I do know a simplistic " Good guy/Bad Guy" approach will not help matters..and you get too much of that on both sides from the debate.
If Hamas has not caused mass Israeli casualuties, it is because of bad weapons, not for want of trying.
But I don't get the point of shooting WW2 level rockets into Israel. Its' like a chichuahua biting the ankle of a Rottweiller.

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by lionking

Called ******* what?

Hamas wants Israel destroyed, do you agree? There are Hamas cheerleaders in this and similar threads.

This. No fan of Bibi and I think the Isreali response should be much more targeted...but the excuses for Hamas in this thread are just as bad as the bling "Israel can do no wrong" people.
The problem with Anti Zionism is that horse left the barn in 1948, and I have never gotten a honest answer about what would happen to the Five Million Jews in Israel if Israel was destoryed, beyond a ritual chanting of "Secular Palestinian State" which has about as much chance of happening as a snowball in hell. HAMAS is a militant Muslim group in case yo uhave not noticed...

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by dudalb

You can say that about both sides.
Hamas and Bibi, frankly, are a godsend to each other.
I don't know what the solution is but I do know a simplistic " Good guy/Bad Guy" approach will not help matters..and you get too much of that on both sides from the debate.
If Hamas has not caused mass Israeli casualuties, it is because of bad weapons, not for want of trying.
But I don't get the point of shooting WW2 level rockets into Israel. Its' like a chichuahua biting the ankle of a Rottweiller.

I suppose it's better than doing nothing while being ethnically cleansed. People tend to fight when they're being systematically exterminated, even if it's ultimately a hopeless endeavor. Go figure.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by Michel H

No, it's not naive, it's just the (international) law.

The Arab-Israeli conflict has been (mostly) solved in 1967, by United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...Resolution_242):

Unfortunately, the U.S. has wanted to impose its own policy, more favorable to Israel, and this has blocked any solution since (since the U.S. is, of course, a very powerful state).

And how does Israeli settlers building houses that encroach on said established boundaries fit into this scenario?

This conflict has played out before. Israel bombs Gaza until it believes it's gotten all the tunnels and other targets that they normally couldn't directly bomb. Then a cease fire is eventually established.

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Okay dude out with it. Is your issue Israel or which side the US is backing?

I take the controversial side that genocide is bad.

You don't have to see a path from here to utopian peace between all nations to see that Israel is currently engaged in a campaign of ethnic cleansing, that the blockade and constant bombardment of Gaza is a genocidal campaign.

We've seen through the last years that there is clearly a deliberate program of settling Palestinian land and displacing the people. Any resistance to this is met by the IDF, and if resistance persists there is a collective punishment in the form of bombardment. The cycle continues as Israel annexes more and more land, concentrating the Arab population into smaller and more squalid communities.

I'm not sure what your point about the US is in this. The US is the sole voice that is preventing the UN, or any other international authority, from applying pressure on Israel to actually broker a peace. So long as the US backs Israel, they will not divert from their current campaign.

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by dudalb

You seem to have no problem with Hamas trying to kill Israeli Civilians, though.
As I said, only thing keeping Hamas from slaughering Israeli civilians is they have lousy weapons with which to do it.

Strange that you accuse me of trying to find a "good guy" yet you seem unwilling to accept that both Israel and Hamas might both have unclean hands.

Tell you what, I also support the US severing all military aid to Hamas. Oh wait, we're only endorsing one side of this slaughter.

Do you deny that the involvement of the US emboldens Israel to take a more belligerent stance towards Palestine?

[theprestige]

"genocide"

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

Strange that you accuse me of trying to find a "good guy" yet you seem unwilling to accept that both Israel and Hamas might both have unclean hands.

Tell you what, I also support the US severing all military aid to Hamas. Oh wait, we're only endorsing one side of this slaughter.

Do you deny that the involvement of the US emboldens Israel to take a more belligerent stance towards Palestine?

Oh, they both have unclean hands, but you seem be willing to cut HAMAS a lot more slack in that regard then you do Israel.

[dudalb]

Yeah, Isreali policy toward the Palestinans stinks on ice, but calling it genocide is a bit much.

[Michel H]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

And how does Israeli settlers building houses that encroach on said established boundaries fit into this scenario?

It seems to me that, after the Israeli military and police leave the (currently occupied) West Bank and East Jerusalem, most Israeli settlers who live there (perhaps not the most extremist ones) could remain in Palestine as Palestinian residents, while retaining their Israeli citizenship. This is actually a controversial issue, because (if I remember correctly) the Palestinian Authority want that the settlers give up their Israeli nationality if they remain in Palestine, under a peace plan with Israeli evacuations.

[Belz...]

Originally Posted by dudalb

You would probably no thave a problem with the Israelis being ethnically cleansed....

That was completely unwarranted and downright insulting.

[Belz...]

Originally Posted by dudalb

You seem to have no problem with Hamas trying to kill Israeli Civilians, though.

Is it even possible in your mind to have problem with BOTH of these things?

Originally Posted by dudalb

Oh, they both have unclean hands, but you seem be willing to cut HAMAS a lot more slack in that regard then you do Israel.

Possibly because the balance of power is EXTREMELY unequal. Yes, Hamas is a huge problem, but that doesn't justify the settlements or indistriminate bombings. In fact those things seem entirely unrelated.

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Dude.

None of the countries in the Middle East even recognize Israel's right to exist. It's a rather complicated scenario.

Which is why the whole idea of s "Secular Palestinian State" is just about unrealistic as you can get.

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by dudalb

Which is why the whole idea of s "Secular Palestinian State" is just about unrealistic as you can get.

Sure, it's about as realistic as a secular, democratic Israeli state.

[Aidoneus]

Originally Posted by Michel H

It seems to me that, after the Israeli military and police leave the (currently occupied) West Bank and East Jerusalem, most Israeli settlers who live there (perhaps not the most extremist ones) could remain in Palestine as Palestinian residents…

How well do you think this would work out?

[TurkeysGhost]

Bomb used by the IDF to flatten the AP and Aljazeera press office was American made.

Quote:

The bomb Israel used to bring down Al-Jalaa tower (with
@AP
&
@AJEnglish
offices) is a #US_Made GBU-31 bomb that weighs 907KG.

ThreadThread on #Israel's use of bombs & missiles Made in the USA to pound #Gaza:

https://twitter.com/muhammadshehad2/...45475176493056

[Michel H]

Originally Posted by Aidoneus

How well do you think this would work out?

I think this could work out very well.

Keep in mind that (part of) the West Bank is run by the Palestinian Authority, which is more moderate than Hamas, and has already a security agreement with Israel (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-i...-idUSKBN27X2D1).

There are already about two million Arabs living in Israel, I don't see why there couldn't be about 600,000 Israelis living in the West Bank and East Jerusalem (the total Arab population in West Bank and East Jerusalem is currently about 3 million). This would actually create a fairly symmetrical situation.

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by dudalb

Oh, they both have unclean hands, but you seem be willing to cut HAMAS a lot more slack in that regard then you do Israel.

It is almost as if the positions of occupier and occupied are different and bear different responsibilities. Naa that is a crazy thought that there are any moral obligations on behalf of an occupying force.

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by dudalb

Yeah, Isreali policy toward the Palestinans stinks on ice, but calling it genocide is a bit much.

Yea it is just a little ethnic cleansing like we are seeing in Myanmar genocide.

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by dudalb

Which is why the whole idea of s "Secular Palestinian State" is just about unrealistic as you can get.

Just like a secular jewish state. That is a fundamental contradiction in terms.

[kmortis]

Stop the personalization. The topic, whilst contentious, is not an excuse for personal bickering

Responding to this modbox in thread will be off topic Posted By:kmortis

[Garrison]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Well that's the problem.

What do you do when you can't end a conflict because ending the conflict means one or both sides will not pay for their sins to everyone's satisfaction?

You do what they did in Northern Ireland, live with it and make a deal anyway.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by Garrison

You do what they did in Northern Ireland, live with it and make a deal anyway.

To be fair that is probably the closest fair parallel.

[p0lka]

Something I read earlier made me think about the chess playing.

Quote:

This is Israel’s standard operating procedure. Expand into Palestine via illegal settlements and then cry foul when Palestine and or Hammas retaliates only to further expand via more illegal settlements after they clear out desirable areas with rocket fire.

It was someone's post on reddit, but did make me think a wee bit.

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by p0lka

Something I read earlier made me think about the chess playing.


It was someone's post on reddit, but did make me think a wee bit.

Yeah, there's a clip going around of a settler, speaking in a thick Brooklyn accent, explaining to a Palestinian family that he has displaced that "if he hadn't done it someone else would have".

Many of these settlers that are the point of the spear in the annexation effort are not locals. They are Jewish people living abroad that come to Israel for the sole purpose of colonizing Palestinian territory.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/...h-settler-says

Quote:

Roughly 60,000 American Jews live in West Bank settlements, where they account for 15 percent of the settler population, according to figures revealed Thursday by an Oxford University scholar and expert on this population.

https://www.haaretz.com/.premium-stu...bank-1.5392253

[Belz...]

Originally Posted by p0lka

Something I read earlier made me think about the chess playing.


It was someone's post on reddit, but did make me think a wee bit.

Typical imperialist stuff. No surprise there.

[The Atheist]

Nothing to see, move along...

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/...est-jenin-raid

Can you say extra-judicial murder, or does that make one an antisemite?