Israel/Palestine
Related: About this forumIsrael orders destruction of entire West Bank village
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Lithos (a host of the Israel/Palestine group).
Six days later, Israeli officials — accompanied by soldiers — handed out demolition orders to the entire West Bank village. These orders referred to demolition decisions stretching back to 1995.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
patrice
(47,992 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)The US and Israel wants them all dead and forgotten.
The other states in the Middle East see them as poster children in rhetoric, and as unwanted luggage in action.
Europe is busy screaming at itself
And no one else in the world really gives a shit what happens in Israel / Palestine... despite both sides' claims of global conspiracy against them, Uganda, South Korea, and Belize really don't give a good goddamn as a matter of policy.
The whole world ISN'T watching. What action, then?
mazzarro
(3,450 posts)Unfortunately, Palestinians have become accepted as the people to sacrifice for the greater benefit of the world - as determined by the Israel, US and Europe.
patrice
(47,992 posts)The probability of whether difference leads to more difference is higher because of something than it is with nothing.
Sorry! that's a bit "meta-", but I guess I'm trying to say that if you want to change the world, or whatever, you have to create a starting point that is essentially different, since what preceded that starting point has played its potentials out, i.e. is no longer different, so it cannot elicit anything else that is different.
There needs to be some kind of permanently DIFFERENT stable base to build on. Maybe something like that has already been established somewhere somehow, but timing is important in how that then progresses by yet another strategic difference.
patrice
(47,992 posts)Whatever change is possible, whatever difference can be created is the product of specific situational factors that I'm not part of, so it'd be presumptuous and stupid to say "Palestinians should X, Y, and Z."
Have you ever managed a development project? or taught? Do you start out by strictly limiting what your engineers/students do? Or do you establish the purpose, general traits, and functions of the product/outcome? and then let them apply their own resources to fulfill the goal?
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)There's not a lot of stuff the Palestinians haven't tried yet. And none of it seems to work. Peaceful efforts are crushed, violent efforts are crushed, and they get crushed if they don't bother, too. 
But you have a fair point, we're not the ones to say "guys, do this!" - especially since Americans fucking suck at accomplishing any of our goals in the first place. it'd be the blind leading the lame.
Bradlad
(206 posts)Like what for instance? Only firing one or two rockets a week?
One thing they haven't tried, something they swear they never will try - is accepting Israel's existence as a neighbor in peace and as a Jewish state and agreeing to stop trying to kill Israelis and ethnically cleans Israel of all it'w Jews. You know, the kind of behavior that is expected of every Western state in the world. i.e. resorting to military violence only in self defense.
You do realize of course, but you can't admit it because that would violate the "narrative" - that what is termed "oppression" by anti-Israel bunch - is defense against those ongoing attempts to destroy Israel and its Jews. These are attempts that have never stopped since Israel was founded (and before) - attempts that the Palestinians swear to each other that they will continue until Israel is gone. But don't say that out loud because then some might wonder if maybe what Israel is doing to defend itself is actually far less in terms of destruction and enemy lives lost than any other Western country would mete out under similar circumstances of self defense.
But since accepting Israel's existence and actually living in peace with Israel in spirit and in deed is the only thing that will get them peace, prosperity and their own state - that outcome doesn't look too good, does it? But certainly, keep on encouraging them. Maybe your small efforts can help ensure that they'll live in misery and under "oppression" for many more decades and generations to come.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)I can't place why.
At any rate, your entire post is gibberish and deeply lopsided propaganda. Yes, yes, poor Israel, little asthmatic weenie with mismatched socks, getting picked on by all the bullies, blah blah blah, I've heard it before. Okay, evil hook-nosed blood-drinking savages who control the world media and dress in keffiyah, heard that one too.
Bring me something original.
King_David
(14,851 posts)'Okay, evil hook-nosed blood-drinking savages who control the world media and dress in keffiyah, heard that one too. '
i never heard that before.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)But that's the meat and potatoes of Bradlad's post. He just takes three paragraphs to make a point easily conveyed by that one sentence, in an effort to make it seem as if that's NOT what he's saying.
Spend enough time studying racism, and the dog whistles, code phrases, and general rhetoric all start to stand out really clearly. Works for sexism, homophobia, and all that other stuff, too. Once you identify the critical terms and structures, it's pretty easy to dissect the statements being made into their base components.
He's also machinegunning the talking points - firing off a big tangled cluster of stuff that catapults the propaganda, while being hard to counter due just to sheer volume and tangledness.
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... I thought WE were the "evil, hook-nosed, blood-drinking savages who control the world media".
I wish you guys would make up your minds.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)And who are "we guys" Holden?
Also, self-hatred is a pretty gnarly thing to be afflicted with. You considered therapy?
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)I'm totally proud of being a hook-nosed, blood drinker who controls all the media. Who WOULDN'T be?
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)And do you have any reason think that any of us in the I/P forum even THINK that way?
If not, you need to delete that post.
If so, link to the threads where that was said(other than the ones where ALL of us alerted on any assholes who said anything even remotely similar and got them 'stoned).
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Shira for example has openly voiced support and sympathy with efforts to threaten and dehumanize Jews who do not share Shira's opinion of Israel. And of course, Shira equates all Jews with Israel, which is a #1 hallmark of some David Duke shit going on in that head. And as you can see from Shira, Pelsar, and Bradlad, the same age-old antisemitic bullshit is happily used by these people as anti-Arab bullshit (or in its original form against noncompliant jews, of course)
shira
(30,109 posts)Seriously?
Where'd I ever state such a thing?
And I equate all Jews with Israel?
Well, I guess this bullshit is about all you've got since your arguments are total shit.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)I think the count was up to seven opportunities before I got tired of watching you chase your own hindquarters.
Just for the record, I'm certain I'm not mistaken in my characterization of you. As I explained to King_David on this thread, once you learn the ins and outs of how bigots speak, pointing them out is pretty easy. But, I'll give you a chance, Shira.
I brought up that there were efforts by Team Israel (personal colloquialism; it means Israel's fanboys, people like you, rather than Israel itself) to deny Richard Goldstone's identity as a Jewish person. There was an effort to deny him access to his own grandson's Bar Mitzvah, by a South African Zionist organization. He was called, among other things, "A traitor to the jewish People," and his report has been likened to the Holocaust in some quarters. I'm sure een you can recognize the blatant antisemitism of this, and I'm sure that you can understand that the source of bigotry does not make it any less bigoted, right? Top this off with death threats, personal harassment of him and his family, and attempts to scuttle his career, and you've got yourself a standardized, sterilized, scientificized case of an antisemitic attempt at intimidation.
You never once denied this. Nor, pointedly, did you DENOUNCE it. In fact, you seem to have joined in, and mocked the guy for being the victim of this. That registers as "support." But like I said, I'll give you a chance.
Do you stand against such actions, Shira?
shira
(30,109 posts)...and threaten Jews? Does that mean that since you haven't yet commented on the nauseating, vile rightwing antisemitic videos calling for the murder of Jews from the PA (as you have yet to denounce any of that) it means you openly support and sympathize with that vulgarity?
Goldstone deserved every bit of legit criticism that came his way, just like any other person. His report was beyond ridiculously libelous. There's an entire website devoted to refuting his report, with absolutely no personal attacks. It proves beyond any doubt how awful Goldstone's report was, and why so many people were upset with Goldstone:
http://www.goldstonereport.org/
As for death threats, being called a "traitor", harassment - no one deserves that. I've seen worse here directed at people like Alan Dershowitz. I haven't denounced that either and he's about as pro-Israel as it gets (even though he is a blowhard). I disagree with those who demonize him as I think it's uncalled for, but I don't accuse his Jewish enemies of being bigots for laying into him. In fact, all of Israel's leaders are treated worse than Goldstone here on a regular basis. Can you see yourself denouncing all that, and if not, why not?
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Among other things. Jesus christ, that rant of his made David Irving look like a cool guy to bring to a bris by comparison.
All of Israel's leaders are treated worse than Goldstone here (I presume "here" is DU?) on a regular basis? Does Azurnoir organize attempts to interfere with the religious observances of Benjamin Netanyahu, Shira? Does Ken Burch insist that Avigdor Lieberman isn't a "Real Jew" regularly? Myself, I know I haven't made any death threats to Tzipi Livni. Does Shaayecanaan leave threatening phone calls on the phone of Ehud Barak's family?
if you could show me this happening, why, yes, I certainly would denounce it, and I would hound the people doing this until they stopped. Just as I'm doing to you. Sadly, you can't seem to find enough spine to do the same. You give me this mealy-mouthed, "I don't think he deserved it, but he deserved it" followed by a sad, sorry attempt at tu quoque. I suppose I'll let it bridge the gap between now and the next time you pull that shit.
As for those videos, I told you, after you responded to what I provided, I would respond to yours. I'm not your dancing money, you want to have this conversation, it will follow a conversational course. This Tucker Carlson spewing of talking point after talking point isn't going to work with me.
Also? It's bad form to bitch about sources, and then provide the site you did. What, only your lopsided propaganda is valid? Please.
shira
(30,109 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/05/israel_and_palestine_0
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab-Israeli_peace_projects
Plus of course, there's the recent efforts by Abbas and the PA to seek - oh, what's the word I hear Team israel throw around so often - legitimacy, that's it. You know, their bid for a Palestinian state through the UN?
pelsar
(12,283 posts)Last edited Thu Jul 12, 2012, 08:58 AM - Edit history (1)
there has yet to be a genuine Palestenian non violent initiative that has taken root within the Palestenian society. Try looking and look real hard, the closest you'll get is intifida I with its limited violence, that both sides understood. (you can blame arafat for destroying those gains as he replaced the local leadership with his own corrupt one).
outside of that.....you'll get little pieces here and there but nothing on the society level. More so the game of terrorist attacks not being part of the Palestinians society (i.e. violence) as many have claimed is rather absurd.They don't get to disown the terrorist attacks, celebrate them and then make a claim of "non violence"
your first link: shows limited and restricted low level violent protests and complains that Israel/IDF is resisting them and therefor it doesn't seem to work....kinda shows that there isn't much dedication to that non violence from the society.
your second was in essence an attempted invasion across an international border, nothing to do with the Palestinians in the west bank for gaza, and nothing representing a change in the society.
your third are little projects for a limited amount of people. Nothing bad but hardly a society level initiative that is essential
___
when a peace now group emerges from within the Palestinians society, starts a society wide conversation/protests about the variations on peace vs land, then you'll have something to claim as far non violent peace movement. They will also have to withstand attacks from hamas and the PA but that will be because they are attempting to change their society...and then you'll have some really "meat" to your claim.
in the meantime your claim is nothing more than that designed for the useful idiotes that the Palestenians and friends need.
shira
(30,109 posts)This link shows what Palestinians have seen since Oslo in the mid 1990's, 24/7 around the clock. Not just from Hamas but the PA, which has controlled the Palestinian media ever since Arafat...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/11343829#post90
It's that type of genocidal hate incitement that leads to 73%, almost 3 of every 4 Palestinians being in favor of Islamic hadiths that call for the murder of Jews....
http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=229493
========
Now rather than deflect, ignore, deny, blame Israel, or mock Jews for being poor little victims, please point to us grassroots groups within Palestinian society (the Palestinian equivalent of Peace Now or J-Street) that are calling for an end to all that hate; and instead are calling for genuine peace, conciliation, and tolerance for the other.
If you cannot, and of course you won't be able to, then please refrain from writing ridiculous, idiotic statements about past Palestinian commitments to genuine peace.
There have been none.
Ever.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)At any rate. You asked, I gave a sample. You want to keep pushing your outrageous statement that all Palestinians are frothing, genocidal, murderous miscreants.
And you demand information I already provided. Look at the Wikipedia page I linked.
Also, as pointed out in the Guardian article, there's a sort of nasty little habit of crushing attempts at peaceful resolution by Israel. Even within the UN, as was recently shown in the PA's bid for statehood.
shira
(30,109 posts)...see that for themselves. I asked you some simple T/F questions and you evaded them.
Tell me, what do you make of those PA videos? Do they promote peace in your opinion? Do you think they're vile? Are you sickened by them? Or no reaction?
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)The information you have asked for, and then ignored to continue your blood libel-flavored bullshit?
C'mon, Dukey, I haven't got all day.
shira
(30,109 posts)The writer is Neve Gordon, who compares Israeli policy to that of the Nazis. His articles appear frequently on Ernst Zundel's neo-nazi website. He opposes 2 states. Now why should anyone SANE take what this guy has to write seriously?
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)If it weren't for this post, I would have simply thought of Neve Gordon as "the guy who wrote the article I posted" and no more.
Now I know that he's not only the guy who wrote the article I posted, but also yet another Jewish man who is suffering from Team Israel antisemite fuckwits. It's kind of funny, really. I decided to look for mr. Gordon's writings where he likened Israeli to Nazi Germany... It's not too uncommon a comparison, so I figured i'd find something, right? My opinion is there are some valid comparisons and some invalid comparisons in that, but hey.
Anyway, so I hit up the google. I figured it'd be simple enough to find an article where he likens Israel to the Nazis, like I said. I'm on page eight, and so far, I've seen lots of accusation that he's made this comparison, but none of them seem to have links to follow through with that. I've found a few of his articles via counterpunch, the guardian, and al-jazeera, no mention of Nazis. The closest he comes is calling the Yisrael Beiteinu party "neo-fascist." Given its Kach origins and its blatantly fascist rhetoric ("no citizenship without loyalty," for real?), this characterization is pretty much on the mark.
Well, okay, there's plenty of allusions to naziism... Directed at Neve Gordon. Apparently he's a self-hating Jew, a neo-nazi, a "scourge of Jews," a "wannabe judenrat," a "kapo," "in bed with the terrorists," is a holocaust denier, "not a real Jew," that sort of stuff, I could go on. It would be stunning, if I expected any better from Team Israel.
So, your next claim, that his articles appear frequently on Zundelsite. This one's much easier to check (thanks, site search feature!). Exactly ONE of Gordon's articles appear on that website. It was not published by that website, in fact it was published by The Nation in 2002. A Zundelsite reader copied it wholesale and apparently posted it to a messageboard. Gordon's less-than-glowing review of Finkelstein's "The Holocaust Industry" (The Nation, 2000) also appears, prefaced with a warning to Nundelsite readers that it's full of "politically correct hiccoughs." Gordon is mentioned two other times; both times a single sentence is taken from something he co-authored with Ruchama Marton for Amnesty in 2002. If you want to check for yourself (I'm not linking even a googlized zundelsite here) it's simple; go to google, and type "site: (site URL) search term" - for example, "site:http: //www.democraticunderground. com pit bulls breastfeeding at olive garden"
That's it. One plagarized article, one plagarized book review - both published by The Nation - and two mentions from one Amnesty report. That's "frequently," and you portray it as if Gordon himself is writing for zundelsite. As I said, I don't expect a lot from Team Israel, but come the fuck on.
Your third claim, that he opposes two states, is a blatant falsehood. Again, no surprises from Team Israel, but you could at least expect your bullshit to get fact-checked. He describes himself as a supporter of the two-state solution and has published articles calling on President Obama to work harder towards that solution. In his article "Netanyahu and the One-State Solution," he makes the case that the longer Israel stalls on a two-state plan, the more certain "power sharing" will be. perhaps that's where you drew this falsehood from?
You ask why any sane person should take Neve Gordon seriously? Here's your answer; because someone like you is telling them not to. You present not one, not two, but THREE easily-disproved lies as your main argument against the writer, Shira. Not only three lies, but one of them happens to come with all that gnarly antisemitic baggage from Team Israel... which is honestly starting to look like quite a trend for you.
I'll tell you what. Since you actually... responded to the information I provided (can't really call it "answered," can I?) I'll hold up my end of the bargain and give you that reply about those videos you provided. But past that... we're done here. I'm not going to watch you spin in a circle for another week.
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)of supporting genocide against Jews (Israelis) it would seem so as you keep posting this stuff
shira
(30,109 posts)...and it's yet another trope; the dual loyalty canard.
What do you make of those videos from the PA? Anything there you disagree with? Are they vile? Do they promote peace in your opinion? Do tell...
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)however I said nothing about 'dual loyalty' and in the recent past haven't you implied your Israeli in any event? No dual loyalty there in any event
and seeing as how you back those videos albeit we do agree they're vile but for different reasons I'm sure I can understand your not wishing to answer the question about the POTUS will you willing to answer honestly whether or not you support a 2 state solution with the PA as the head of the government in a Palestinian state
Mosby
(19,491 posts)"The us and israel want them all (palestinians) dead and forgotten".
Do you agree with that?
Jury is thinking about it right now btw.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)
Mosby
(19,491 posts)JURY RESULTS
A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Thu Jul 12, 2012, 04:43 PM, and voted 2-4 to LEAVE IT ALONE.
Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT and said: Have to agree with the alerter. I don't want them dead.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I am pretty sure (s)he meant the power brokers/DC, NOT every American. Actually in this case it's the alerter who is using a blanket statement.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: A bit of hyperbole
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
3 and 5 gave you a pass, something you would not get with the mods.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)It seems to hinge on "something I disagree with" rather than "something actually vile."
Imagine that. Perhaps you could do me a favor and argue the point? Show me the love for the Palestinians, Mosby; Shira, Pelsar, and Bradlad are trying, god bless them, but they're making a pretty bad botch of it, with their assertions that Palestinians are rabid animals who absolutely deserve everything done to them in all cases.
Show me I'm wrong. Show me your deep, heartfelt affection for the Palestinian people.
pelsar
(12,283 posts)this is one of those kind of statements that i expect from a person who has little understanding of the real world interactions and has to reduce them to a very simple statement so they themselves can understand it.
and then we have to contrasting statement:
Show me your deep, heartfelt affection for the Palestinian people.
so were left with a view point that gives two options: heartfelt affection or rabid animals.
which leaves us with the conclusion that the writer has zero understanding of the conflict, the people involved and in fact i would venture to say very very very little experience in the real world involving different groups and cultures
or perhaps option 2: a massive amount of intolerance and cannot fathom nor accept a different opinion.
there could be a third option, but i'll stick with no 2 as the most likely
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)and my level of "give a fuck" has dropped to low enough levels where I no longer regard insipid bigots of being worth the in-depth attention I might have once given them.
You might want to check your own posts - Bradlad's and Shira's as well - before you start sniveling about my pointing them out.
Mosby wants to counter my statement? Then he should counter it.
pelsar
(12,283 posts)as i wrote you offer two positions: hate/bigotry or love.
reminds me of people i know in cults or the real religious, they too have simplistic either/or kind of views on life and people.
I'm just noting your lack of tolerance, though i doubt you see it that way, but it is rather obvious.
shira
(30,109 posts)1. You shouldn't lump all Palestinians together. You're making the argument that Hamas and the PLO not only speak for, but are the Palestinians. Any criticism of Hamas or the PLO is criticism of all Palestinians. Maybe they're all the same to you, but not to all those who criticize them.
2. I don't see any love for Palestinians from their alleged supporters like yourself. What they go through under their own leadership, as well as outside the territories like in Lebanon (under apartheid) is worse than anything Israel does to them. So what I notice is that almost all their alleged supporters, those who claim to 'love' them so much, really don't give a shit about them and only have something to say if Israel is blamed. I'm going to call you on your faux concern for Palestinians from now on, each and every time you pretend you're advocating for them.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)1) Oh, if only any of you had actually drawn a distinction between Hamas, the PA, and Palestinians in general, you might have an argument here, Shira. But... No. All through this thread, you guys have been using "the Palestinians." "The palestinians" are genocidal. "The palestinians" have never sought peace. "The Palestinians" want to eradicate Jews. "The Palestinians" have brought everything upon themselves etc., etc., etc.
Again, as I explained to King_David... I've been playing the anti-racism game for quite a good while, and you're not going to be able to give me any surprises, Shira. I understand your inane rhetoric perfectly. If you don't want your own shit thrown back into your face, might I suggest you stop dropping it everywhere?
2) First off, someone who only talks about Mauritanian slavery when they think it'll distract from discussion of Israel has no room to make this sad attempt at deflection. Second, it's a lie. I'm pretty certain I've been in agreement several times with you that the palestinian government sure as fuck isn't helping the Palestinian people. I'm sure others have as well. Your sad case of pseudologia fantastica needs treatment, not enablers.
shira
(30,109 posts)When talking of their leadership, when I say Palestinians it's because I can't just claim "Palestine" has sucky policies and does bad stuff to Israelis, like you do when you say you oppose Israel and its policies.
I mentioned Mauritanian slavery b/c it hadn't been addressed once in 15 years by HRW. Which blows HRW claims of advocating for universal human rights - their very mission - to shit. You appear indifferent to HRW ignoring rampant slavery for the past 15 years. Kinda like the way you ignore murderous, racist threats against Jews. There goes your anti-racist street-cred again. Best to defend HRW and never criticize them, ever, for anything. They're the bestest and most awesome no matter what!
As for your pro-Palestinian advocacy, I'd wager it's no better than most others who claim the same but never once speak out about Palestinians oppressed under Arab leadership. Look up conditions for Palestinians in Lebanon, for example. It's apartheid w/o question, but no one claiming to be pro-Palestinian will admit it. So why aren't any pro-Palestinian advocates calling it for what it is? Do they not know what's going on? Do they fear calling it apartheid for some reason? Their advocacy is bullshit. I doubt yours is any different. Palestinian rights are only important if Israel can be blamed. That's an anti-Israel position, not pro-Palestinian.
shira
(30,109 posts)...and therefore question my loyalty to the Democratic Party, liberal values, etc.
Cut the shit.
I have a problem with every US administration propping up the PA, Saudi Arabia, etc. Both Republicans and Democrats. Israel supports the PA as well w/o holding the PA accountable for anything. This isn't a right/left issue. I fully realize this is about OIL, and all western nations are scared shitless to oppose the PA, Hamas, MB, Iran, etc. In fact, we all know this is about oil. If Romney wins, nothing will change. Will you question my 'loyalty' if Romney wins?
I do support a 2 state solution even with the PA in control. At this point, I'm with Pelsar and think part of the solution has to NOW include freedom of speech within Palestine, first and foremost. Otherwise, 2 states will fall apart and Palestine will be yet another failed Arab state at war with Israel, making such a solution a joke. More lives lost, not that you and yours care, unless Israel can be blamed somehow....
Now your turn. Why do you think those videos are vile (for a different reason than me)?
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)that will serve as answer enough thank you 
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)1st video: Hamas dickdribble saying Hamas dickdribble. No surprises. "We will rise up and sweep across the land" sort of stuff, blah blah blah. Suuuure you will dude. It's worked so well in the past.
2nd video; If you can provide a name for Hamas dickdribble there, why not for this guy? That's Muhammad Ahmad Hussein, the Mufti of Jerusalem. Two minor mistakes on your part; his quoting that hadith occurred on January 9th, 2011, not "in the last few weeks," and he was in fact not fired by Abbas - the previous Mufti of Jerusalem, Ekrima Sa'id Sabri, is who you're thinking of (and oh boy, he was a real charmer, too, all Protocols of the Learned Elders and shit.)
3rd video: Ibrahim Madi. I love his line, ""They will not be deterred unless we blow ourselves up." Maybe it's my vaguely ill sense of humor, but that cracked me up. I sort of pictured him as Thunder from "Big Trouble in Little China" (never seen it? best movie ever) Now, notice something about the crowd? Look closely. Does it look like anyone is really giving a shit what this guy is saying? it pans over the crowd a few times. half of 'em appear to be asleep or staring off into space, the other half are just sitting there listening to the guy. The way mosque sermons work is that pretty much anyone can make an appointment to stand up and say whatever they like, and the men in the mosque are under no compulsion to give a flying donkey turd. In this case, it doesn't look like he's wowing them.
4th video: yup, there's the "indoctrinated little kids" thing. Crazy thing is... a small child will parrot anything his parent tells him to. Four year olds aren't the world's paragons of critical thought, I'm sure we can agree to that. Now here's the thing... As a child grows older, their brain develops and matures, and autonomous, critical thought begins to form. This is the cause of how children behave between the ages of 12 and 20 - "teenage rebellion." Basically, whatever stuff their parents pumped into them when they were little is purged, and then re-evaluated based on the child's own knowledge and experiences, over a period of several years; and rapid changes of opinion can occur during this period of development as well. So, what kind of individual experiences do you expect these kids to receive, I wonder?
5th (non)video: Ewwwwww, weird.
6th video: ...And? A Palestinian music video expressing anger towards settlers. And it sounds like Arabic polka, no less. Here, let me show you something similar;
7th video: I think at this point, I need to pipe up with something. In the territories, "yahud" means "Israeli" more than it means Jews in general. When this girl is demanding weapons to fight the yahud, she's asking for weapons to fight against the Israelis. It's a call to war against Israel, not a call for genocide against Jews. Well. Perhaps it could be, but it's pretty damn unlikely. The hell does she care about your uncle Bernie down in Daytona?
And then more Hamas dickdribble that really doesn't need extra commentary.
Moving on to your Jpost article... The Israel Project? Really? Ungh, for fuck's sake Shira, can't you find a source that doesn't have its cheeks bulged out by Avi Lieberman's withered testicles? Alright... Let's see what we've got here.
The survey’s more positive findings included that only 22% supported firing rockets at Israeli cities and citizens and that two-thirds preferred diplomatic engagement over violent “resistance.”
Among Palestinians in general 65% preferred talks and 20% violence. In the West Bank it was 69-28%, and in Gaza, 59- 32%.
Hmmm. Know what it looks like to me? it looks like a bunch of Muslims weren't willing to reject scripture, but aren't really interested in following that particular scripture, either. Sort of like how a lot of Christians believe in angels... but don't actually believe in angels. They're in the bible, so it's true, but, angels? Pssht, please.
I wish I could find the poll on TIP's site. I'm curious about the questions and methodology. I did find a similar one, but it only had like, 500 respondents, and so had as much worth as freeze-dried meatloaf.
At any rate, there you go. I'm not sure exactly what you wanted. Perhaps you wanted me to fall to my knees and join you in proclaiming Palestinians to be bloodthirsty animals who deserve what they get?
Not going to happen. it you want me to say there are a lot of Palestinian dicks, and that the political machinery of the territories is especially rife with dicks, though, that's a statement I'll stand behind. I've stated my belief that the Palestinian government is doing the Palestinian people no favors at all. if you want me to say that Hamas is a pack of hateful assholes... well... yeah, they are. Is there a greater point here, or are you just looking for some pats on hte head and reaffirmation of the obvious?shira
(30,109 posts)Those videos couldn't be more explicit in calling for the murder of Jews. By officials from both the PA and Hamas. FYI, Palestinian media is entirely controlled by the PA (in the WB) and Hamas (in Gaza). THEY call all the shots totalitarian style, and arrest/kill journalists who do not tow their line. That you cannot muster any disgust whatsoever for clear, undeniable Jew-hating, murderous incitement betrays your anti-racist street cred.
Seriously. How could those videos be any worse WRT centuries old, Jew-hating murderous incitement? How bad does it have to get before you're disgusted by that racist swill and are moved, like any decent liberal/progressive, to utterly condemn it?
As to the Israel Project Poll, it was overseen by Democratic pollster Stanley Greenberg and conducted through a Palestinian firm. Again, as a self-proclaimed anti-racist, when 3/4 of Palestinians agree that all Jews must be murdered, you're unmoved, apathetic, and looking for excuses to ignore it.
======
Here's what I think is going on, and correct me if I'm wrong.
Hamas and the PLO are passive victims who cannot possibly be Jew hating and murdering psychotic racists/bigots. To accept the evidence at face value is bigoted in your view and anti-progressive. To blast Hamas and the PLO would be the same as blasting all Palestinians and that's bigoted (since the people are one with their oppressive Hamas/PLO leadership). OTOH, Israelis (never to be confused with Jews no matter the evidence) aren't and cannot be victims. Rather, they are the oppressors.
This explains the denial. The apathy. It cannot be any other way and no amount of evidence would be enough to persuade you otherwise.
Am I warm?
pelsar
(12,283 posts)for those who don't know" Yahud is arabic for jew. Palestinians regularly use the word yahud because that is what they mean...jews. They use it when talking about american jews, israeli jews, french jews, they mean jews.
now this ruins the "progressive" attempt to differentiate between israelis and jews, but the Palestenians simply don't agree to play the game.....the conflict is very much a jewish/muslim/arab conflict and the western game plan just doesn't seem to take.
but I'll give your credit for advanced knowledge, far more here than the avg poster:
It's a call to war against Israel, not a call for genocide against Jews. Well. Perhaps it could be, .
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)(The PA DID that in 1994, in case you've forgotten).
It serves no purpose to insist on the rest of the phraseology. All diplomatic recognition is the same.
Also, it would have been much more likely that Palestinians would have fully accepted Israel if it hadn't been for the illegal West Bank settlements, the water theft, and the collective immiseration. There's a limit of what you can expect from people who've been put through the ringer the way Palestinians have been.
pelsar
(12,283 posts)"we can all agree" that any society that daily attacks its neighbor via rockets, heavy machine gun fire, mortars, kidnappings (attempted), and celebrates those very attacks has no right to expect any kind of sympathy from its neighbor
furthermore we can all agree that dictatorships that are given their independence only stabilize the enduring injustice that the citizens have to endure and no one interested in civil rights could possibly agree to such a thing.
i'm sure we all agree......
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)daily humiliation, daily harassment by Israeli's living in the West Bank to name but a few things can make peace quiye difficult
pelsar
(12,283 posts)actually on a daily basis most west bankers may only see a passing jeep on the road beneath the village....may pass through checkpoint with the show of their iD...hardly a humiliating process or harrasement
and thats about it.
now of course you wouldn't know any of this, that part i understand as you've never been, however what is more interesting is your imaging something that doesn't exist and writing about as if you do actually know about it.
and of course the only checkpoints in gaza are hamas checkpoints and humiliation by the "genetically correct" govt, which is why they are justified in shooting heavy machine gun fire into israel along with rockets
how would you describe someone who writes about stuff they don't actually know about?
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)I don't simply imagine these things but are you actually positing that because they don't happen to every single Palestinian every single day it doesn't count?
seems you have different standards for Jews and Palestinians/Arabs in general
I also find you comment about nationalism and genetically correct governments to be almost amusing coming from a nationalistic Israeli or pot meet kettle
pelsar
(12,283 posts)nor am i saying it doesn't count....just straightening out the 'story you want to sell."
as far as the genetically correct govt...is that not your position? you've made it clear that you believe the Palestinians should have their own govt, that need not be democratic, i.e. led by the "right" people.
i as an israel require a democratic govt which means anybody regardless of genetics gets to be voted in to govern.
guess which one of us gets the far right nationalistic title?..
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)"as far as the genetically correct govt...is that not your position? you've made it clear that you believe the Palestinians should have their own govt, that need not be democratic, i.e. led by the "right" people.
i as an israel require a democratic govt which means anybody regardless of genetics gets to be voted in to govern."
lets see how about Israel? Isn't Israel an example of an ethnically dominated government? We're told that Israeli Jews are of a single ethnicity that being Jewish.
Now yes there are nonJews allowed in the Israeli government as a forever minority party when has Israel ever in its history had an elected nonJewish PM? never thats when
more over the very fact that you separate Israeli Jews from Israeli nonJews by pulling the ethnic card says volumes regardless of whether or not you meant it to, they just are not equal are they? IMO all Israeli's are ethnically the same they are Israeli as Palestinian are Palestinian
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Most Israelis, if they're sensible to stay the hell away from the Territories(where Israel has no right to be)live lives of complete safety.
Palestine is living at YOUR mercy. You aren't living at theirs. Your side in this has the upper hand.
pelsar
(12,283 posts)Most Israelis, if they're sensible to stay the hell away from the Territories(where Israel has no right to be)live lives of complete safety.
heavy machine gun fire from gaza enters israel straight through the fence, mortars fly over. These are almost daily occurrences and are so "mundane" that only get a small line if even that in the local papers.
you only know about it, if you know a solider or friends living next to gaza.
________
so now what is you claim about 'complete safety? do you still claim it, now that yet another attempt has been made to educate you?
__
damn right my side has the upper hand, mainly because it made realistic decisions and made the best out of limited resources, the other side and friends seem to have trouble with that concept....
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)And the effect is trivial compared to what Palestinians have been put through in Gaza and in the West Bank.
I condemn the machine gun fire, but your country is not the main victim here...Israel holds dominance in this.
pelsar
(12,283 posts)you made two wrong statements...
1) are you going to stand by them?
2) forget your made them? or
3) admit you were wrong?
israel is attacked daily from gaza (thats the norm)
israelis within israel are attacked from gaza (and its not askelon or ashdod)
you should learn to be accurate in your statements, and when you are not i will remark on them,
so which is it?
1, 2 or 3?
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)What happens at the Gaza border does not equate to the entire country being in danger of extinction. Israel is never GOING to be wiped out, no matter what. I don't think the Arabs even want it wiped out. If they did want that, they'd have made it happen by now. Askelon and Ashdod are not Tel Aviv and Jerusalem and Haifa. Those places are NOT under siege. Nobody in Israel is in greater danger than Palestinians are under the Occupation.
The reality is different though...most Arab countries(I strongly suspect)actually want to be past this conflict, but they can't abandon the Palestinians. They can't end it WITHOUT Palestine getting a real state and without it being clear that that state will never be taken away by the IDF.
pelsar
(12,283 posts)perhaps your one of those who believe `the ends justifies the means' and you can make up any kind of statement you like and claim it as a fact?
i never mentioned 'extinction" wiped out etc
you mentioned being attacked.....i corrected you, machine gun fire, mortars from gaza is considered attacking israel
just as katushyas are and kassams are
shall i repeat the question: do you still stand by you original statements that israel isn't attacked daily and that israeli within the green line are not in danger?
If they did want that, they'd have made it happen by now.
we know your weak on history but did you really miss the 48 and 67 wars?
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)They were there at the border because the Soviet Middle East specialist told the Arab countries that Israel had nuclear weapons.
If they'd really wanted to destroy Israel, they wouldn't have surrendered after less than a week. They'd have just kept going with it.
pelsar
(12,283 posts)ok i'll give you a quick lesson. and knowing you i'll have to repeat it a few times:
egypt closes off the port of Eilat to shipping; That is considered an act of war:
israel is on high alert for over a month, which means its economy is dying:
Egypt and Jordan have a unified command.
israel send its airforce out and destroys the arab air forces and the ground war with egypt begins. Jordan and Syrian soon join in.
israel destroys the egyptian army and reaches the canal, there is virtually no army between Cairo and the IDF.
Israel destroys the Jordanian army, takes the west bank and no army between amman and the IDF
Israel takes the Golan and has a clear view to Damascus with no syrian army to stop them.
there was no arab armies left to fight
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)You can't have it both ways...the Arabs can't be on the verge of destroying Israel AND always lose all the wars WITH Israel.
And the Six Day War was forty-five years ago...that has nothing to do with the situation of today. You're at peace with Jordan, Egypt(even with the Arab Spring)is still essentially peace, and Syria has no capacity to threaten anybody, other than itself(the civil war there will probably go on for years to come, thus neutralizing any external danger that country might pose to anyone).
Israel is NOT in an existential physical struggle...its survival is assured even if it stops treating the Palestinians this way.
The only existential struggle it's in is philosophical...it's becoming a place that fetishizes the army, that treats military service as something that everybody should just accept as an inevitability and never question, that maintains an unnecessarily massive defense apparatus while increasingly ignoring basic human and social needs, and that grows less and less democratic and more and more nationalistic. The danger isn't that Israel will be invaded...it's that it may, in the long-term, turn into Slobodan Milosevic's Serbia-that, at some point, somebody wearing a uniform like yours(not, before you bring this up again, your neighbor the general, but somebody down the line)will stage a West Bank Srebrenica. This is the true existential threat that people like you will have to fight against...and I hope you can defeat it, because a nationalist-for-nationalism's-sake Israel would be a place that couldn't be worth living in for anybody. I really hope YOU wouldn't want to live in a place like that(though I'll honor your wishes and make no assumptions about that).
pelsar
(12,283 posts)you made the claim about the 6 day war that the arab armies could have continued to fight....i just corrected you.
_______
do you notice a pattern here because i do:
1) first you make a statement that is entirely false.
2) i call you out on it and then correct you with a brief summary
3) you then claim that history is no longer relevant
4) you then go into a few paragraphs of how israel is wrong today....
____
now i'm sure there is some term used to describe your system, but i really don't know it. We all know you have an ideology that drives your opinion,that is based on the "victim" cannot be held responsible for their actions and the stronger is responsible for all actions philosophy.
In order to justify this ideology you want to use history to show just how much of a bully israel is and how its violent actions have nothing to do with anything any arab country or the Palestinians have done. The problem with what your trying to do, is that history doesn't agree with you.
you actually have to either ignore attacks on israel, pretend they don't really count, or redefine what the meaning of an attack is. (you've done all in these short few hours)
As we have discovered here, that goes in line with the philosophy of "the ends justifies the means" which translates into "anything that works", the concept of credibility, accuracy is not relevant if it does not help us toward our goal: a dictatorships based on the proper genetics.
I would hold your "end game" is not only immoral, but your means is immoral as well....add to that your pushing for "enduring injustice"
making up facts, having a blind eye to actual events, must always be called out for those others who are interested in knowing what actually happened and want to base their opinion on that-its called "having an open mind"
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Israel, as an entire country, is under daily attack.
So, no, I'm not wrong. I'd only be wrong if the entire country was under siege, which it clearly isn't. It's Palestine that's under total siege. They are the main victims in the present-day situation. And their fight against your country's occupation is no different than any other country's fight against any other occupier. Occupation is always morally the same. There is no situation anywhere on the planet in which you can say that the occupiers are the victims and the occupied are the oppressors.
pelsar
(12,283 posts)i hadn't realized that the definition of a country being attacked is if the entire country is under siege.
hey did the US know that in 1941. Pearl Harbor was in hawaii and it was only a couple bases that were shot up.
____
i do believe i understand, however. if you would stick only to the facts, learn the history, it would really screw up what you could write. After all if israel is attacked daily and israelis living within the green line have to constantly worry about random attacks, it kind of screws up the narrative that the palestenians are helpless victims.
however, i'm a stickler to the concept that its best if ones opinion is based on facts and events rather than some kind of emotional/ideological viewpoint that requires closing ones eyes to the events and history, hence i will continually fix your attempts at changing historical facts and events.
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... apparently ... you have to attack 100% of any country in order for that attack to be on that country. According to that "logic" Pearl Harbour was an attack on the people of Honolulu, Germany only attacked West London and 911 was a concerted attack on the Lower Manhattan Redevelopment Board.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Life in Tel Aviv or Jerusalem is pretty much just life in a big city anywhere. The people in those places are not GREATER victims, are not in more fear, than the people of the West Bank and Gaza. That's the point I'm making.
They are nowhere near as besieged as the people of the West Bank are...those people you treat as if they are ALL responsible for what Hamas or the worst of Fatah does(when you know perfectly well that the rank-and-file noncombatant majority there doesn't have any way of stopping the crazies and don't deserve to be punished for them).
I hate all the violent maniacs on both sides...but the way to get rid of them is to end the conditions that create them, not to pretend that maintaining the status quo could ever get rid of them.
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... Hamas doesn't shoot rockets and mortars at Tel Aviv because..?
A) They restrain because of possible casualties among the civilian populace of Tel Aviv
B) They don't believe that attacking Tel Aviv would be a "reciprocal response" to NOT being occupied by Israel
or
C) They don't have weapons with the range.
Bonus Question...
How many rockets and mortars has Israel fired on the "besieged" West Bank this year?
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)isn't exactly less of a siege. Neither is the restriction of the water supplies(something that is simply indecent and morally unacceptable)or the deprivation of Palestinian livlihoods through the destruction of the olive groves(or the uprooting of those groves and their replanting on the illegal settlements).
Neither is martial law.
Neither is the deliberate refusal of bureaucratic approval NGO's to construct humanitarian projects for Palestinians-or the destruction of innocent, completely harmless projects like those alternative energy systems just because the NGO's had realized that those projects weren't ever GOING to get bureaucratic approval and were needed anyway.
None of the above is justified. None of the above can EVER be effective in ending the tactics you mentioned above(the fact that they've never worked yet is already proof that they never can work).
The Occupation just doesn't WORK to protect Israeli security. And the Siege of Gaza can never be effective in ending the rocket fire and machine gun fire, because it never has been effective yet.
All of that has reached the definition of insanity.
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... of Israeli's "swaggering"? I have some of them walking, skipping, and even a couple running kind of swishily, but -- as of yet -- I haven't seen anyone in the IDF "swaggering".
Bradlad
(206 posts)Another one of those statements that totally amaze me. Especially when the Palestinians themselves openly admit that the "wringer they've been put through" is the terrible humiliation of failing to destroy their neighboring state of Israel despite starting and/or participating in several full-scale military wars to do so - each one a crime against humanity according to international standards. I always try to step back a little from the comments and ask what the point really is. And that can lead to a mind-boggling realization in how totally some of the pro-Palestinian - anti-Israel commenters here, so casually accept (and embrace) a narrative that is so utterly opposite from the easily observed facts of this conflict.
Ken, hello. The "wringer" you speak of is completely of the Palestinians' own making - every single hardship and misery they endure is completely and totally under their power to prevent and always has been. Israel has never attacked any Palestinian or Arab entity as an act of aggression. It is now almost a trite observation but you know the homily about what would happen if the Israelis put down their weapons vs what would happen if the Arabs did. Unfortunately, behind that adage lies the simple but essential truth of this conflict: One side wants to live in peace without war. They've said it repeatedly over decades and show it in all their actions. The other side wants to destroy the first and glorifies the use of violence aimed at civilians to do so. They've said it repeatedly over decades and consistently show it in all their actions.
Yet you totally ignore such unpleasant but essential basic truths for which the evidence in favor is overwhelming, and the evidence against is almost nonexistent. But it's not that complicated. If you attack someone they will defend themselves if they possibly can. Their right to do so is encoded in the UN Charter and more importantly, in human DNA as well. Yet you make blithe comments about the wringer (not ringer) that the "Palestinians have been put through". I still find it amazing that otherwise rational people can be so disconnected from reality even when they are faced over a period of many years with tons of evidence that they are utterly wrong.
I believe you are a sincere person. If you actually value a moral and peaceful world, as I'm sure you believe you do, please step back and ask yourself if there's some chance that you could be very wrong about the side you have chosen to support in this conflict. And if supporting a side that chooses violent aggression against a state and people that wants to live in peace does not add to the unhappiness and misery in the world - especially the unhappiness and misery of the Palestinians.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)The destruction of Palestinian olive groves is also a continual act of aggression.
The restriction of access to water(something NO decent person would defend) is an act of aggression.
The settlements are all acts of aggression.
The destruction of Palestinian homes is an act of aggresion, punishing an entire family for what only one person in that family may have done(and for what no one else in that family could have prevented).
The destruction of harmless solar panels just because they hadn't received bureaucratic approval(approval that would never have come through because the Israeli government never wants anything to get better in Palestine)is aggression.
Israel is NOT an innocent victim in this conflict, it can't claim that everything it's done is ok but nothing Palestinians have done is, and it's bullshit to claim that this is all the Palestinians' fault.
If Palestinians all went completely nonviolent tomorrow, NOTHING would change. Not a single IDF soldier would be pulled back. None of the settlements would be removed.
And the only side I am on is the side of justice...I don't want Israel destroyed or Israelis harmed, and nothing I've said or proposed could ever lead to that.
Nothing can EVER justify destroying entire villages. Anywhere. It's always immoral and unnecessary.
pelsar
(12,283 posts)sheeesh, how many posts does it take?
a little history: before israel invaded in 1982, there were lots and lots of katushas that were landing on N.Israel.
That is called being attacked
its not a hard concept ken: when a missile blows up your house in kiryat Shmona, that is launched from another country its considered an act of war;
Israel tried mini incursions to stop those missiles and none works (up to the litani river-look it up). Finally the decision was made to kick out the PLO that was launching the missiles, that was the war of 1982.
____
if you have trouble believing that there were missiles landing in israel in 1982:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Lebanese_rocket_attacks_on_Israel
July 1981: the PLO opened a heavy and indiscriminate artillery barrage on the Galilee panhandle using Katyusha rockets and 130mm guns. This barrage lasted 10 days driving the residents of northern Israel underground into bomb shelters.
June 1982: Twenty villages were targeted in Galilee bombardment by the PLO and 3 Israelis were wounded.[1
these dont mention the sporadic individual missiles that were shot randomly.
____
now are you going to "digest" this info and accept the fact that israel does in fact have to right to stop people from trying to shoot missiles at its cities? as was the case in 1982 or am i going to have to repeat myself again?
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)But South Lebanon was under Israeli occupation for years...and there was no justification for that.
That occupation also helped cause the massacres at Sabra and Shatila, when Ariel Sharon allowed the Falangist(fascist)"Christian" militias to enter the refugee camps even though he knew(being a sabra)that the only possible reason they wanted to go in was to slaughter people.
That aside...there's no defense for the present-day situation in which restricted access to water is used as an Occupation tactic. That tactic doesn't do anything to stop violence, and in fact only encourages it. So do the destruction(or illegal replantings on the settlements)of Palestinian olive trees, acts that deprive innocent Palestinians of a livlihood and achieve nothing in doing so.
pelsar
(12,283 posts)the 'quick invasion and immediate departure was tried:
it was called the Operation Litani 1978
________
it didn't stop the rocket attacks.
___________
once again your wrong; wrong about the 1982 being a war of aggression and wrong about the "quick invasion."
care to admit it?
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Staying on achieved nothing. Bolstering the fascist "South Lebanon Army"
an army that persecuted everybody who happened to be a Lebanese Muslim or any stripe, whether or not those people had anything to do with Hezbollah at all)was criminal.
None of that made Israel any safer.
If the Lebanese Occupation had achieved anything, Israel wouldn't have re-invaded Lebanon years later.
What part of "invading Lebanon is an illustration of the definition of insanity" do you not understand?
And no, nothing would have been better if Israel had had an uninterrupted occupation of Lebanon.
Bradlad
(206 posts)It always seems to tell you exactly what you want to hear.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)If the hardline hasn't worked yet, that is already proof that it can't ever work in the future.
History proves me right on this.
You can't seriously believe that the status quo tactics will work in the future if only everybody shuts up about them and just accepts them.
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... your "truth" is as biased as your opinion of Israelis.
In fact, the "hardline" as you call it, has been effective. Terror attacks from the West Bank are significantly down from what they were under the "softline" Livni government. Sure, the PA won't negotiate in good faith, but they wouldn't negotiate in good faith under Livni either. Support for Israel in the US among people of all parties is higher today than it was under Livni.
Sounds like "hardline" is working for the Israelis.
Bradlad
(206 posts)Can't remember who. But in terms of damage and hardship being caused to each side I'd say the status quo is working pretty well for Israel. Sometimes a patient ability to put up with a less than perfect situation longer than your enemy - will get you where you want to go better than trying to "push the river" as some wise person once said. Israel is thriving. The Palestinians who live in areas where attacks against Israel do not emanate from are actually progressing economically.
I think you already realize that and that means the Palestinians who are getting a taste of peace may eventually get tired of the misery they've brought upon themselves (or allowed their corrupt leaders to impose on them) and they may get fed up enough to demand new leadership. And I think that's what really bothers you deep down. You're so emotionally invested in some mythic Palestinian victory over the Jews of Israel that you keep hoping that maybe just a few more rockets and Israel will throw in the towel.
It would really bother you if some independent Palestinians separatists tried to end run the PA and agreed to an extended benign "occupation" by Israel while working with Israeli assistance to prove that they could build a peaceful society that would be deserving of statehood in some distant future, wouldn't it?
Added: BTW This would of necessity be a state that was not Judenrein - just as Israel has a sizeable Arab population, so should any future Palestinain state have some Jews living there. Ethnicity only matters to bigots and racists anyway AFAIC. It's people's actions that I judge them by. The fact that Abbas insists that any Palestinian state will be Judenrein is the best evidence there is that the Palestinians (or at least those who speak for them now) are not even close to deserving their own state.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)There is equal blame(and certainly there's greater Israeli blame since 1967).
The side you are being an apologist for(I'm not on either "side", I'm just against oppression)is not innocent and is not the primary victim.
There is pain and humanity on both sides of the Green Line.
And we already know that immiserating the Palestinians is never going to cause a change in the Palestinian leadership, so why keep pretending that it could?
And you're wrong...I'd be GLAD to see independent Palestinians separatists, as you call them, emerge and provide some better leadership. But the present situation actually sabotages those people by giving Fatah and Hamas the chance to imply that they're collaborating with the Occupation.
Your posts sound as if they were dictated to you over a speakerphone. It's painfully obvious.
(on edit)and it's a despicable lie to say that I wish any harm on the "Jews of Israel" or any one else who is Jewish. For the last time, you don't have to take the side of the Israeli government in this conflict just to prove you aren't an antisemite. You know perfectly well that I'm not and that nobody else here on DU is(the occasional crazies who spew such filth are immediately chased off by all of us).
Bradlad
(206 posts)I don't know why you think I have accused you of antisemitism. It's a game I do not play.
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... your going to be accused of anti-semitism gives you a free pass to say any biased statement you like.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)That is the same thing as accusing me of being not only an antisemite, but virtually a Nazi.
Bradlad knows perfectly well that I don't want to see anybody "defeated" and that I don't want to see anyone suffer.
Bradlad
(206 posts)I would never call anyone here anti-semites or bigots or Nazis or anything similar. I take at face value what people say. I don't worry or even think about them not being truthful. I figure if they are being deceitful about their beliefs it will eventually become apparent over time without me pointing it out. But when I accept what someone says as truthful I may call them out if they say something later that contradicts their position in some way.
I take it as a personal challenge to be civil to people with whom I have strong disagreements. I don't always succeed but I do try and I welcome anyone letting me know if I ever cross that line.
I'm not speaking for others here but my beliefs about this conflict are centered on the notion that the use of violence to get your way (not in defense) is the line that should never be crossed - either between individuals or nations - and is the root cause of wars. And so I see Israel, the side that only uses violence in defense, as generally in the right and I see the Palestinians, who openly admit and brag about their use of violence against innocent civilians to get what they want - as generally in the wrong. All my views on the conflict can be reduced to that over-riding question.
I accept that I may come to another conclusion about this conflict some day than I have now. But so far this is the most logically consistent view that I have been able to derive from what I've learned about the history of the conflict and I welcome anyone here to provide a reasonable argument against this view. I promise to consider it. I have yet to see any well thought out contradictory views.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)(some active-duty IDF personnel ARE settlers, and this should be outlawed by the Israeli government, because soldiers who are also settlers are endangering the lives of other soldiers by helping perpetuate the settlement project).
And it has used it against even NONVIOLENT Palestinian protesters(and yes, there are a lot of such people-not ALL Palestinians who support self-determination are blood-soaked berserkers, contrary to Likudnik myth.)
It has used it to destroy Palestinian farms and olive groves...leaving Palestinians who had lived on those farms without livlihoods.
Such fighting is NOT "in defense". There was never any justification for Ariel Sharon(as the IDF Chief-of-Staff)to invent the
"settler movement" in the early 1970's.
And just so you know, I ALSO oppose violence-it's just that I reject the idea that, in this conflict, the violence of one side is evil and the violence of the other side is inherently virtuous. Violence is violence is violence. Don't want it? Don't USE it.
Bradlad
(206 posts)The reality is that the "illegality" of the West bank settlements is not a settled legal issue. There are reasonable arguments that maintain that the most substantial legal basis for what goes on in the WB is the San Remo conference - which spelled out that the area should be seen as a homeland for the Jewish people and encouraged their settlement there. I'm not a lawyer but I believe there's enough there to say it is not a settled legal view. International law on such things is in its infancy. Also, the advisability of the settlements for israel is a separate issue from their purported legality or illegality. There's a decent argument there that they bolster Israel's ability to defend itself. I don't have a strong opinion on that either way. I see it as an internal Israeli matter. They are the ones who have been repeatedly attacked from that stateless territory and it's their lives at stake.
And it has used it against even NONVIOLENT Palestinian protesters(and yes, there are a lot of such people-not ALL Palestinians who support self-determination are blood-soaked berserkers, contrary to Likudnik myth.)
Many states, even democratic states, use sanctioned police violence to quell or control protests and riots. Israel controls the WB and has the legal duty to maintain the peace there. You can get angry with their tactics but they are similar to many Western governments including my own. Also, like the Seattle riots in the US, there were many rioters who planned to destroy property and create as much damage as possible to goad the police into attacking innocent protesters. The same thing goes on on the WB I'm sure.
It has used it to destroy Palestinian farms and olive groves...leaving Palestinians who had lived on those farms without livlihoods.
It's a complex question. I say that if Israel had no threat against its existence from the WB, then Israel would not be there. (As the situation existed from 1948 to 1967). But since Israel was attacked from there both in major wars and terrorist attacks over many years, and those that attacked in the past claim that their greatest goal is to do it again, Israel has a right to be there to protect its citizens. Added: I also believe that gives Israel the right to take other prudent and necessary measures to establish its defense there. Israel believes that building settlements and a protective wall are parts of that defense. I think others have little right to second guess them as it is Israeli lives at stake.
Since Israel has the basic right of defense you can argue about their methods but that's not the same as saying they are aggressors in the sense that I'm using it. They are still defenders although you don't like their methods. Fair enough. My argument is sort of - if you play with fire you may get burnt. (Or if you live in a neighborhood where a lot of arsonists hang out your house may go up in flames some day.) I realize that not all Palestinians are "arsonists". And so it's not necessarily their fault. But it definitely is not Israel's fault that they have to be there to protect Israel from attack either.
Violence is violence is violence. Don't want it? Don't USE it.
This is a facile and meaningless statement. If someone attempts to shoot your child would you forsake the use of violence to stop them? Of course not. Why would you expect Israel to do so?
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)That is the same thing as saying that you think I want to see Jewish people slaughtered. Shame on you for implying such a thing.
I want peace...not the "defeat" of anybody.
Bradlad
(206 posts)I did not say anything about Jews being slaughtered. I said you hoped the Jews would throw in the towel. Nice try though.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)A two state solution where the Palestinians had the whole West Bank and Gaza, with a guarantee of never having their water supplies and electricity interrupted, period, doesn't equate to that at all.
You're still fixated on the impossible resolution of "Peace-through-military-victory". The problem is, this situation is at permanent military stalemate and military victory is impossible. Also, military victory would never be permanent, since it could only result in the emergence of new, even MORE extreme Palestinian organizations that would vow to "avenge the shame" of defeat.
It's just not worth trying to "win" in military terms.
Bradlad
(206 posts)You have never really addressed this issue that I raised several comments ago. The one about the radically different outcomes if either the Israelis or the Palestinians put down their weapons. For that matter I've never seen any pro-Palestinian commenter seriously take on this issue in the context of achieving peace some day. It is the issue that lies at the heart of the conflict after all. It logically shows who is to blame for the continuing conflict. It's the side that keeps shooting at the other side to destroy it. It's not the side that only shoots when it's attacked to defend its citizens from further attacks.
And if you really want to try to say that it does not lie at the heart of the conflict, then why avoid it? It should be easy to answer.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)You are assuming the Israeli government is made up of saints...that the West Bank settlers have no political clout and that nobody in the government is beholden to them...and that nobody that government is driven by ideological opposition to the very idea of a Palestinian state(you're also assuming that Bibi and Co. don't still secretly believe in the "no such thing as a Palestinian" meme). You're assuming that no future Israeli political hacks will try to win an election by endorsing West Bank revanchism after a two-state solution.
You're assuming that the Israeli side is purer and more humane simply because, well, it SAYS that it is. Sorry, but if I don't buy into "American Exceptionalism", I'm not going to endorse anybody else's exceptionalism either.
Sorry, but I simply don't accept the idea that the Israeli side can automatically and always claim moral superiority. It's a country like any other, led by politicians as cynical and fallible as any other.
Bradlad
(206 posts)People of any ethnicity or nationality are fallible. Fortunately, democracies are composed of fallible people living under the rule of law that is referenced to a constitution document and with an independent judiciary to keep everyone equal under the rules.
It is never perfect but it's the best and fairest system humans living together in large communities have ever devised.
And in this system, if you only use violence to defend yourself - and use persuasion and negotiation to get what you want from others - then you are a moral society when it comes to the very big questions.
And if you relish the use of deadly violence to force others to give you what you want - and if you see persuasion, give and take and negotiation as a sign of weakness - then you are immoral on that level.
It's a very simple equation that even five-year-olds can understand. It makes peaceful coexistence possible between large states and between kids on the playground.
I'm surprised these basic facts of life are so unfamiliar to you. Don't you ever think about these things at any depth beyond your emotional hope that your team wins - even if they are led by genocidal psychopaths that just can't stop trying to kill their neighbors?
pelsar
(12,283 posts)ken, you really shouldn't write that, your knowledge of history is so piss poor that the history books would have be entirely rewritten if they were to contain your version.
We would have to redefine words like "attack" etc to fit your definition.
but now your showing off your ability to read the future as well. I'm impressed any advice on stocks?
that is already proof that it can't ever work in the future.
___
i wonder if you do realize that you are in fact a religious fanatic? Only fanatics believe they have the ability to read the future with 100% accuracy, see history through a filtered lens, can interpret events past and future with 100% certainly. Your posts are filled with such interpretation and when shown otherwise you either ignore them or dismiss them....all tell tale signs of any religious fanatic, of course no fanatic i ever met believes they are in fact a fanatic, they just believe that they know the answers and nothing will change their mind......you fit the profile.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)You are the one who is displaying blind faith, in clinging to your belief that was hasn't worked, over and over and over and over again, for years now, will EVENTUALLY work if you just keep doing the same thing for awhile longer.
And you've been misstating my views about Palestinians and democracy. Of course they are capable of democratizing...but the conditions you and your fellow soldiers are preserving are one of the major obstacles to that, because by making democratization a condition for ending the occupation(as you personally do)you are creating a situation in which those Palestinians who ARE working for democracy in their own political culture can be accused of being collaborators. Far from giving them room in which to work, as you seem to think you are, you are taking that room away. THAT is why I object to tying democratization(which does need to happen)to the end of the Occupation-not because I lack confidence that they can do it, but because I don't want them to be sabotaged in the effort.
pelsar
(12,283 posts)a serious discussion about the conflict must first start with a good base, in this case the history of the conflict shows how each side reacts to what was done, but it requires historical knowledge. From that point one can go on to a more detailed discussion of more subjective subjects and their options. However,
in the past few posts you've claimed either directly or indirectly:
1 both in 48 and 67 the arab aim was not the elimination of israel
2 1982 israel was essential not attacked from Lebanon
3 Israel never tried a short mini invasion before 1982
4 machine gun fire into israel does not constitute an attack on the country
in far more previous posts you spent days explaining how out of occupations democracy cannot be established
you claimed that israeli occupation was far worse than the British
you've shown no knowledge of intifada I and its implications
you've shown no respect to the Palestinians who are now trying to push the Palestinian society toward democracy by not supporting them- you claim they will be accused of being collaborators.....
so are they stupid for doing it? or do they know something more than you? (now you can start redefining what you wrote as per your custom after being called out for being wrong)
but most important is that your an advocate of enduring injustice- nationalism first by those of the proper genetics (racism) and then 'you'll respect their cultural decision for the traditional arab style government (i.e. dictatorship-as you do hamas)
_____________
i think thats a pretty good summary of the knowledge you have shown of the conflict. Given that "knowledge" and the fact you post of what should have been done, what has to be done, as if its factual, i would say your views are based on a belief far more than they are in historical events. add to that your intolerance for those who disagree (i can recall a few rather accusatory post by you)
you get a good example of a fanatic in my mind.......
pelsar
(12,283 posts)you claimed israel wasn't attacked in 82
you mentioned that israel should have tried a small mini invasion and retreated.
both times you were wrong
care to admit it or not?
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)They haven't converted to Judaism yet.
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... that Judaism seeks to convert the Palestinians to Judaism and that Israeli troops maintain a presence in the West Bank to bring Palestinians to Judaism?
I don't know whether this statement is offensive or just ignorant... in either case, it doesn't belong here.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)n/t.
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)"believe... that Judaism seeks to convert the Palestinians to Judaism and that Israeli troops maintain a presence in the West Bank to bring Palestinians to Judaism."
Those are your words, not mine. If I wanted to say such words, I would have done so. Obviously, you should not say such words and attribute them to others.
Your statement, as you recognized, is either "offensive or just ignorant... in either case, it doesn't belong here."
Ruby the Liberal
(26,703 posts)3 didn't agree with me.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS:
Falsely frames the I/P dispute as a battle to establish Jewish religious supremacy. Stupid, hateful, inflammatory and pointless.
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Jul 12, 2012, 09:02 PM, and the Jury voted 3-3 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Not seeing it as any worse than most of the thread and don't see how it alone frames anything. Some subjects require really thick skin and a good flame retardant suit and I/P seems to be one of them.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: This entire thread is filled with anger, even when someone tries to peacefully explain, it is met with hatefullness.
The post in question isn't polite, STILL it was NOT part of the heated previous posts. It very well could be either hateful OR it could be a poor attempt to remove the heated
series.n The benefit of Doubt says let it stand.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Please, it doesn't falsely frame anything. At best it's a tongue in cheek comment, at worst it's an accurate response to the poster who said "they've tried just about everything".
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT and said: And the discourse hits bottom and starts digging. Begone troll.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)This isn't a conflict of religion, Another. It's two governments having an ugly land dispute. Religion only goes so far as the bigots on each side can fling it.
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)Last edited Fri Jul 13, 2012, 11:29 AM - Edit history (1)
You initially said (#7), "There's not a lot of stuff the Palestinians haven't tried yet. And none of it seems to work. Peaceful efforts are crushed, violent efforts are crushed, and they get crushed if they don't bother, too." Not only do I agree with that, I posted a statement which I perceive and was intended to reinforce what you said.
You now say (#102), "This isn't a conflict of religion. ... It's ... an ugly land dispute." I agree with that as well. Quite frankly, it seems to be that it should be obvious to everyone. My post (#58), I suggest, reinforces the dispair of those in the region who who have no options and obviously are not going to convert to another religion. There was no serious suggestion by me or anyone else that the Palestinians could solve their problem by actually converting to Judaism.
But you have now posted (#102), "What Holden said" (obviously referring to #67). My post (#58), whether they or anyone likes it or not, emphasises the dispair of the Palestinians.
I disagree that anyone posting #67 could have reasonably interpreted my words as saying or implying that I "believe... that Judaism seeks to convert the Palestinians to Judaism and that Israeli troops maintain a presence in the West Bank to bring Palestinians to Judaism." I never said that. I never implied that. In fact, in post #85, I expressly denied that and expressly pointed that out.
I am now responding to you instead of ignoring you because I've read and respected a number of statements that you have posted. I think that you are wrong in interpreting my actual words to mean what somebody else said. I agree with your statement, "This isn't a conflict of religion."
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)meaning that if the Palestinians converted to Judaism (never mind that Rabbinical council in charge of that would most likely reject such conversions) rather remaining either Muslim or Christian then the land and other disputes would mostly evaporate, IMO several others here knew that too but when in a fight 'taking out' enemy soldiers is all important, if the post had been hidden you could not post on this thread again and as someone rather new to this group may have thought twice about continueing to post here
I've seen it before but what actually 'frightens' me is the number of people here on DU that seem to need to be told what they're reading means rather than taking a comment in context
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)If it was meant as snark, then, yeah, it came off kind of poorly. Might want to expand on what it is you mean next time
pelsar
(12,283 posts)i'm constantly amazed at how so little information can be construed to be factual.
Here i'll give you a starting point: if it was just "two governments" it would have been over in 48. I guess you missed the 67, 73 wars. The PLO attacks from Jordan and Lebanon in the 70's and 80's
Hizballa attacks from Lebanon in the years 2000+
the missiles from iraq
_______
start trying to explain how all of those countries are only "two governments", i'm sure the twisted logic, new definitions of words will be at best interesting..but go for it.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)The topic is also current. We're discussing Israel and the Palestinian Authority circa 2012. Not Iraq circa 1991, not lebanon circa 1982, not Egypt circa 1973, Israel and Palestine, right now.
If you can't keep up, don't show up.
pelsar
(12,283 posts)whereas one of the primary actors may be israel...claiming the PA and HAMAS are one and the same govt is not really true. Each has their own agenda, each has their own governing style each has their own foreign policy...so on the primary level we have at least 3 governments.
secondary level comes into play behind the Palestenians and how much pull they have on the PA/Hamas and if they can torpedo any agreement they don't like..seems they can.
your primary example of that is in the short history of gaza. The PA controlled it, hamas and friends (foreign govts/entities such as iran, hizaballa, hamas in syria) saw an opportunity, took it and took gaza and changed the politics of the area.
another example is now Egypt: If egypt will not control is own sinai and it becomes a staging ground for attacks on israel as we have seen recently, then they too become an active member of the conflict. They may be using a third party to attack israel, but that does not negate the participation, when they can stop if they chose (as they have in the past).
hence those secondary actors are very much part and parcel of the conflict, not just two govts as per the claim.
there, now you've been educated (or if not you, others who didn't' know enough to read beyond your posts for what you left out).
kayecy
(1,417 posts)
notadmblnd
(23,720 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)...probably not an Israeli settlement.
And then there's the article itself...
^ first paragraph.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)It was a new Palestinian village, to replace one of the hundreds that were destroyed by Israel for no good reason-as they destroyed Deir Yassin(forbidding its surviving residents to return), even after admitting that the massacre the Irgun staged there was wrong. That would be exactly the same as refusing to allow the surviving people of My Lai to return to their former homes.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)do you support Jewish settlers living in Hebron?
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Yes, the massacre of Jews occurred there in 1929...there needs to be an official apology and acknowledgment for that from whoever would be considered the successors of the authorities there that caused that massacre to happened, as it was totally inexcusable.
On the other hand, those who came to Hebron at the time of the Six Day War(as I understand it, they said they were just going to be there for a wedding and reception, but then decided never to leave) are being reckless in being there. They have deliberately made their presences in Hebron confrontational and hostile to the locals rather than just trying to peacefully co-exist. It's not as if they've brought anything helpful to the situation by insisting on being there. They could have made the same point by simply asserting a right to be there, but then saying that, in the name of reducing tensions, they wouldn't have actually insisted on exercising that right in practice.
Hebron is a deeply ambivalent situation...and I wish those who had insisted on establishing a settlement there by "creating facts on the ground" had, instead, at least tried actually negotiating with the municipal authorities on the issue. What did they really achieve by forcing the issue?
kayecy
(1,417 posts)Yes if they, or there parents, grandparents etc were born there........How many of the hebron settlers have any connection to Hebron?
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Though the original source, I believe, is Electronic Intifada.
http://electronicintifada.net/content/israel-orders-destruction-entire-west-bank-village/11461