Israel/Palestine discussion

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby Izawwlgood » Wed Jul 09, 2014 5:51 pm UTC

The issue is less a comparison of landmass (which is part of it, but afterall, the Gaza strip is a pretty small area), and more to do with proximity. Look at a map addams, and pay attention to the scale bar. For reference, look at, say, Manhattan or LA.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

yedidyak
Posts: 954
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 10:24 pm UTC
Location: Israel

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby yedidyak » Wed Jul 09, 2014 6:09 pm UTC

Izawwlgood wrote:The issue is less a comparison of landmass (which is part of it, but afterall, the Gaza strip is a pretty small area), and more to do with proximity. Look at a map addams, and pay attention to the scale bar. For reference, look at, say, Manhattan or LA.


The furthest rockets today reached 120km, which puts almost all of Israel in range - except for a small strip at the top and the tip by Eilat.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed Jul 09, 2014 6:30 pm UTC

Vahir wrote:Personally, I'm skeptical about the viability of Palestinian statehood. We're talking about a landlocked, divided nation that's wedged between hostile powers.

Maybe the best thing would be the one state solution. Allow Israel to formally annex West Bank and Gaza, in exchange for local autonomy and international observers to ensure the fair treatment of Palestinians. I mean, the PA is already a de facto client state of Israel, so why not formalize it?


Not really viable. Especially given the political factors. They are simply packed in quite close with people who they are...not friends with. The situation is going to just keep repeating. In any kind of conflict, Palestine loses. Even if neither side has international support. Real support, I mean, not nice words said about them. And...Palestine cannot seem to leave well enough alone. The conflict keeps restarting...a conflict they can never win.

I doubt that all the nice words in the world can make this cease. Good luck, Kerry.

Nah, it just continues until the conflict blows way the hell out of hand one time, and massive death "solves" the proximity issue, or one party moves away. The latter seems difficult, and the former is unpalatable.

User avatar
EMTP
Posts: 1556
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 7:39 pm UTC
Location: Elbow deep in (mostly) other people's blood.

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby EMTP » Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:12 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:And would those problems be worse if Hamas stopped constantly attacking Israel?


Hamas observed a cease-fire with Israel for two years. It broke down because Israel targeted Hamas following the reconciliation of Hamas and Fatah, arresting hundreds and killing many Palestinians.

Hamas doesn't "constantly" attack Israel. Israel "constantly" attacks Hamas and the Palestinians it represents via a military blockade, land seizures for illegal settlements, settler terrorism, and on and on.

Zionists are the aggressor here, both in the larger sense (forcible colonizing another people's land, expelling the majority of its native inhabitants and systematically oppressing the survivors) and in the short-term (attacking Hamas, killing Palestinian civilians, demolishing homes, arresting political leaders, air strikes.)

yedidyak wrote:The furthest rockets today reached 120km, which puts almost all of Israel in range - except for a small strip at the top and the tip by Eilat.


That's good news. Hopefully a slightly less one-sided military picture will encourage Israelis to question the government's policy of an endless war on Gaza.

CorruptUser wrote:It's a bit more complicated than whether or not the Palestinian government is an Israeli puppet. Hamas's own charter has declared that they intend to destroy Israel, as well as some sort of Masonic conspiracy or something. Israel is under no obligation to attempt peace with people who blatantly do not want peace.


Revisionist Zionism, which the Likud party officially embraces, was famous for the slogan "Two Banks has the Jordan/ This is ours and, that is as well."

Personally, I find nothing morally objectionable about replacing a colonial settler state with a native democracy. I understand that you do. But regardless, quoting decades-old polemics is an exceptionally poor way to define what a group actually believes in the present moment. You can find many better, more detailed, more accurate expressions of the guiding principles of Hamas today in the statements of its current leaders and in its actions -- renouncing suicide bombings, participating in (and winning) national elections, observing a two-year cease-fire.

Hamas grew in the 90s as a rejectionist organization in conflict with the PA and their strategy of accomodation. But that dynamic is outdated. Many, many Hamas leaders have declared their willingness to abide by a two-state solution if that is what the Palestinian people chose to support. Of course they wish they could liberate the whole country. But they understand that that's not going to happen [1].

Israel's rejectionism is the main obstacle to a two-state settlement today.

----------------------------------------------

1. Of course, Hamas leaders like Meshal and Zahar have what many would consider unrealistic terms for a two state solution -- like the right of return, not renouncing their claims to the rest of Palestine, and no annexation of East Jerusalem or the settlement blocs. But I don't find these any more unrealistic than Israel's demands of complete disarmament of the Palestinians, control of their border crossings, retaining the Jordan Valley and so on. The reality is that people often want more than they can get, and it is normal in a negotiation that the parties open with terms unacceptable to the other side. Israel has never been willing to formally negotiate with Hamas, so we don't know how flexible either side would be over their various deal-breaker demands.
Last edited by EMTP on Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:51 pm UTC, edited 3 times in total.
"Reasonable – that is, human – men will always be capable of compromise, but men who have dehumanized themselves by becoming the blind worshipers of an idea or an ideal are fanatics whose devotion to abstractions makes them the enemies of life."
-- Alan Watts, "The Way of Zen"

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby Izawwlgood » Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:14 pm UTC

Ah, the voice of rationality and lack of bias arrives!
EMTP wrote:Hamas observed a cease-fire with Israel for two years. It broke down because Israel targeted Hamas following the reconciliation of Hamas and Fatah, arresting hundreds and killing many Palestinians.
Got a citation for that? I tend to not believe claims you're making, since you lack the ability to identify or admit any fault or flaw in non-Israeli parties.

EMTP wrote:Hamas doesn't "constantly" attack Israel. Israel "constantly" attacks Hamas and the Palestinians it represents via a military blockade, land seizures for illegal settlements, settler terrorism, and on and on.
So, the near constant rockets launched are not attacks. They're... something else.

Violence towards Israeli's is great because it encourages Israeli's to think about the situation, but violence against Palestinians, now that's something abhorrent. You engage in this issue the same way Fox News engages in global warming.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

leady
Posts: 1592
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 12:28 pm UTC

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby leady » Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:23 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:Is "pro-active pacification" a euphemism for genocide?

I am not asking to be snide. I am honestly unsure what you mean by the term.


I was being deliberately vague but it would be one of the outcomes deemed unacceptable in the modern world (brutal occupation, deliberate population by force etc) but the mainstay of most wars throughout history.

User avatar
EMTP
Posts: 1556
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 7:39 pm UTC
Location: Elbow deep in (mostly) other people's blood.

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby EMTP » Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:42 pm UTC

Vahir wrote:Personally, I'm skeptical about the viability of Palestinian statehood. We're talking about a landlocked, divided nation that's wedged between hostile powers.

Maybe the best thing would be the one state solution. Allow Israel to formally annex West Bank and Gaza, in exchange for local autonomy and international observers to ensure the fair treatment of Palestinians. I mean, the PA is already a de facto client state of Israel, so why not formalize it?


Obviously because to formalize it would require Israel either to add many Palestinians to its voting rolls, or explicitly admit the apartheid-like nature of their rule over the Palestinians.

The two-state solution has always been deeply impractical -- even if one were to argue, and I think you can make this argument, that it is the least impractical of the impractical options. Pundits have cried it up as an obvious and inevitable solution, but the glaring problems with a tiny, non-contiguous state sharing a large border with a hostile neighbor have been papered over, usually by declaring that Israelis must have whatever they want in the final settlement -- Annex the borderlands! Keep the Jordan Valley! Control the airspace! Keep taking the water! Permanent disarmament (of the Palestinians only, natch)! -- and so on.

If you like partition, as many people do, I suggest the First Inaugural as a reality check on the problems with settling disputes by splitting countries in half:

Physically speaking, we can not separate. We can not remove our respective sections from each other nor build an impassable wall between them. A husband and wife may be divorced and go out of the presence and beyond the reach of each other, but the different parts of our country can not do this. They can not but remain face to face, and intercourse, either amicable or hostile, must continue between them. Is it possible, then, to make that intercourse more advantageous or more satisfactory after separation than before? Can aliens make treaties easier than friends can make laws? Can treaties be more faithfully enforced between aliens than laws can among friends? Suppose you go to war, you can not fight always; and when, after much loss on both sides and no gain on either, you cease fighting, the identical old questions, as to terms of intercourse, are again upon you.
"Reasonable – that is, human – men will always be capable of compromise, but men who have dehumanized themselves by becoming the blind worshipers of an idea or an ideal are fanatics whose devotion to abstractions makes them the enemies of life."
-- Alan Watts, "The Way of Zen"

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10336
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby addams » Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:23 pm UTC

EMTP wrote:
If you like partition, as many people do, I suggest the First Inaugural as a reality check on the problems with settling disputes by splitting countries in half:

Physically speaking, we can not separate. We can not remove our respective sections from each other nor build an impassable wall between them. A husband and wife may be divorced and go out of the presence and beyond the reach of each other, but the different parts of our country can not do this. They can not but remain face to face, and intercourse, either amicable or hostile, must continue between them. Is it possible, then, to make that intercourse more advantageous or more satisfactory after separation than before? Can aliens make treaties easier than friends can make laws? Can treaties be more faithfully enforced between aliens than laws can among friends? Suppose you go to war, you can not fight always; and when, after much loss on both sides and no gain on either, you cease fighting, the identical old questions, as to terms of intercourse, are again upon you.

That is beautiful, EMTP.
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/lincoln1.asp

It was Mr. Lincoln not Mr. Washington.
Mr. Lincoln wrote clearly; For his Time.

Some of his words are Timeless.
Those are good ones. Thank you for reminding us.

He also wrote,
The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here.

Those words have been used all over the world, too.
Those words are properly used in the presence of The Dead.

The words you bring forward are words for The Living.
The US did produce some good little thinkers.

It has also produced it's fair share of war.
Mr. Lincoln wanted Peace. Didn't he?
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
EMTP
Posts: 1556
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 7:39 pm UTC
Location: Elbow deep in (mostly) other people's blood.

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby EMTP » Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:28 pm UTC

It was Mr. Lincoln not Mr. Washington.


It's called the First Inaugural not because Lincoln was the first president but because, as a two-term president, he gave two of them. Of course one could say "Lincoln's First Inaugural," but the speech is so famous that's usually not necessary. Sorry for any confusion.

It has also produced it's fair share of war.
Mr. Lincoln wanted Peace. Didn't he?


He certainly did, but to his thinking, a short-term peace would have led to more wars later on and more tyranny and oppression as the democratic mode of government was shown to be unstable and unsustainable.

The Palestinians want peace, but they cannot make peace against the will of the Israelis, who have most of the power. Many Israelis want peace (although not to the extent the Palestinians do, probably because the degree to which they are suffering, in comparison to the suffering they are inflicting, is tiny) but to understand their attitude I think we need to quote a British, rather than American leader: "Dictators ride to and fro upon tigers which they dare not dismount."
Last edited by EMTP on Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:36 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
"Reasonable – that is, human – men will always be capable of compromise, but men who have dehumanized themselves by becoming the blind worshipers of an idea or an ideal are fanatics whose devotion to abstractions makes them the enemies of life."
-- Alan Watts, "The Way of Zen"

User avatar
mosc
Doesn't care what you think.
Posts: 5404
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 3:03 pm UTC

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby mosc » Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:30 pm UTC

You know I agree with most of what you say EMTP but I still find it impossible to discuss. "settler terrorism" is, well, really really offensive. Also implying a 2 year ceasefire between Israel and Hamas is either ignorant or diluted. You can't use the phrases like you do and have a discussion.

Yes, Israel behaves on a day to day basis like they have no desire to ever reach a settlement or respect a two state solution. I don't see how they could do any different though since the option's been on the table going nowhere for about 20 years now. 20 Years? Yep. September 13th, 1993 that handshake. Does Israel treat Palestinians as well as they should? No. Living inside a country your whole life and not being able to vote for it's leaders sucks no matter who or where you are. But don't pretend that these things are anything like equal sins to Hamas. This isn't some fantasy world where the civilized are held to the highest imaginable standard and those outside are abolished of all sins. You cannot tolerate intolerance and shouldn't be called intolerant for doing so. Condemning the radical is not a radical act. You are not a hypocrite simply because you are not perfect yourself. You cannot have peace without a mutual understanding of the right to life on both sides.

Hamas is ready to accept a two state solution? They have a funny way of showing it. Hamas wants a warzone and creates one. They're not exactly followers of civil disobedience. Enough of this nonsense. This thread is indeed hopeless. Oh well.
Title: It was given by the XKCD moderators to me because they didn't care what I thought (I made some rantings, etc). I care what YOU think, the joke is forums.xkcd doesn't care what I think.

User avatar
EMTP
Posts: 1556
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 7:39 pm UTC
Location: Elbow deep in (mostly) other people's blood.

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby EMTP » Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:54 pm UTC

mosc wrote:You know I agree with most of what you say EMTP but I still find it impossible to discuss. "settler terrorism" is, well, really really offensive. Also implying a 2 year ceasefire between Israel and Hamas is either ignorant or diluted. You can't use the phrases like you do and have a discussion.


Settler terrorism is a polite term because the more accurate "settler pogroms" is so historically loaded. And people say I'm not sensitive.

Are you unfamiliar with the 2012 ceasefire? You can read about it here.

All I can say is, if you don't feel you can have a discussion with me, then don't. I'm afraid the gap of understanding between us not likely to go away in the short term.

Yes, Israel behaves on a day to day basis like they have no desire to ever reach a settlement or respect a two state solution. I don't see how they could do any different though since the option's been on the table going nowhere for about 20 years now. 20 Years? Yep. September 13th, 1993 that handshake.


Yep. And in 2005 Israel trialed their vision of peace in Gaza: creating an open-air prison for Palestinians upon which they inflict violence at will. Between that and their apartheid rule in the West Bank, there's not much to chose, unfortunately.

Does Israel treat Palestinians as well as they should? No. Living inside a country your whole life and not being able to vote for it's leaders sucks no matter who or where you are. But don't pretend that these things are anything like equal sins to Hamas. This isn't some fantasy world where the civilized are held to the highest imaginable standard and those outside are abolished of all sins. You cannot tolerate intolerance and shouldn't be called intolerant for doing so. Condemning the radical is not a radical act. You are not a hypocrite simply because you are not perfect yourself. You cannot have peace without a mutual understanding of the right to life on both sides.


I'm amazed you can write that with a straight face, and think it's an indictment of Hamas, and not the gleeful killers of thousands of Palestinian civilians who crush the economic, political, and social life out of the survivors with endless blockades, land theft, settler terrorism, settlements and walls.

Let me explain to you what Hamas is on its very worst day -- leaving aside its work as a movement of national liberation, a successful political party, a provider of human services, and a de facto government. What Hamas is on its very worst day is like a man with a machine gun mowing down a crowd of innocent people, when a single bullet bounces off a wall and scrapes his foot. That's Hamas. Hamas takes a tiny, microscopic fragment of the cruelty and violence of Israel and reflects it back on Israelis, such that they occasionally experience a tiny fraction of the suffering they routinely inflict on others.

We can talk about the sins of the kettle when you are ready to admit that the pot is black.
Last edited by EMTP on Thu Jul 10, 2014 11:16 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
"Reasonable – that is, human – men will always be capable of compromise, but men who have dehumanized themselves by becoming the blind worshipers of an idea or an ideal are fanatics whose devotion to abstractions makes them the enemies of life."
-- Alan Watts, "The Way of Zen"

User avatar
Vahir
Posts: 456
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 7:20 pm UTC
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby Vahir » Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:17 pm UTC

EMTP wrote:When two armed forces confront each other, whether its natives vs colonists, foreign troops vs rebels, or what have you, the smart thing is to use neutral terms for comparable actions on either side. Abusing language to reflect your dehumanization of your enemies or to cast your, very similar, behavior in a radically different light is stupid.


Don't look at me, I'm just leaving that there.

User avatar
EMTP
Posts: 1556
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 7:39 pm UTC
Location: Elbow deep in (mostly) other people's blood.

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby EMTP » Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:25 pm UTC

Vahir wrote:
EMTP wrote:When two armed forces confront each other, whether its natives vs colonists, foreign troops vs rebels, or what have you, the smart thing is to use neutral terms for comparable actions on either side. Abusing language to reflect your dehumanization of your enemies or to cast your, very similar, behavior in a radically different light is stupid.


Don't look at me, I'm just leaving that there.


Feel free. Saying that both sides have committed cruel and violent acts doesn't mean we need to ignore the vast difference in scale between the crimes of Israel and the crimes of Hamas. Nor the fact that Israel instigated the violence.

How many Israelis did Hamas kill in 2013-2014? How many did they capture and imprison?
Last edited by EMTP on Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:26 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
"Reasonable – that is, human – men will always be capable of compromise, but men who have dehumanized themselves by becoming the blind worshipers of an idea or an ideal are fanatics whose devotion to abstractions makes them the enemies of life."
-- Alan Watts, "The Way of Zen"

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby Izawwlgood » Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:26 pm UTC

... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
Vahir
Posts: 456
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 7:20 pm UTC
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby Vahir » Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:36 pm UTC

EMTP wrote:
Vahir wrote:
EMTP wrote:When two armed forces confront each other, whether its natives vs colonists, foreign troops vs rebels, or what have you, the smart thing is to use neutral terms for comparable actions on either side. Abusing language to reflect your dehumanization of your enemies or to cast your, very similar, behavior in a radically different light is stupid.


Don't look at me, I'm just leaving that there.


Feel free. Saying that both sides have committed cruel and violent acts doesn't mean we need to ignore the vast difference in scale between the crimes of Israel and the crimes of Hamas. Nor the fact that Israel instigated the violence.

How many Israelis did Hamas kill in 2013-2014? How many did they capture and imprison?


I'll concede that Israel botched the aftermath of the murders, and that the punitive strikes against the PA were wrong. But the reason that there aren't as many dead Israelis as Palestinians isn't due to the passivity and innocence of the later, but rather due to an imbalance of opportunity. Just because Hamas's rockets are being intercepted before they can butcher thousands of Israeli men, women and children, doesn't mean that there's no harm done and that those Hamas guys are morally right. You can't try to murder your neighbour's baby because he killed yours.

User avatar
EMTP
Posts: 1556
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 7:39 pm UTC
Location: Elbow deep in (mostly) other people's blood.

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby EMTP » Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:47 pm UTC

Vahir wrote:I'll concede that Israel botched the aftermath of the murders, and that the punitive strikes against the PA were wrong. But the reason that there aren't as many dead Israelis as Palestinians isn't due to the passivity and innocence of the later, but rather due to an imbalance of opportunity. Just because Hamas's rockets are being intercepted before they can butcher thousands of Israeli men, women and children, doesn't mean that there's no harm done and that those Hamas guys are morally right. You can't try to murder your neighbour's baby because he killed yours.


This didn't start because I said Hamas was morally right, but because mosc objected to me describing Israel and Hamas in similar terms, as if Hamas were not much, much more evil than Israel.

I agree that we should not judge people, as David Mamet put it, "By the magnitude of the crimes they have been powerless to commit." However, by the same token, you also can't claim to know what Hamas' behavior would be if they had the power that Israel does. That's a hypothetical. They might be worse, or better, or much the same. (And no, Iron Dome or no Iron Dome, Hamas' tiny unguided rockets would never have "butchered thousands." They are not that dangerous, and Hamas knows it.)

What we do know is that Hamas observed the cease-fire and Israel broke it. Whether you think that that speaks to the moral character of the two sides, or merely to Hamas' realistically calculating on the basis of Israel's vastly greater power, the fact is that they can strike and deal and keep it.
"Reasonable – that is, human – men will always be capable of compromise, but men who have dehumanized themselves by becoming the blind worshipers of an idea or an ideal are fanatics whose devotion to abstractions makes them the enemies of life."
-- Alan Watts, "The Way of Zen"

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby Izawwlgood » Wed Jul 09, 2014 10:14 pm UTC

The problem with the event you are bringing up is that Hamas did nothing to prevent rocket fire from Gaza, and Israel, not surprisingly, responded to the rocket fire.

But sure, Israel 'broke the ceasefire with Hamas'. Because if you have a peace accord with your neighbor, and his friends keep coming over to his place and throwing fireworks from his yard into yours, it's totally a dick move on your part to throw some back into his yard, amiright. Especially rich when your neighbor then cries that all he wanted was peace.

As always, EMTP's contributions amount to Fox News sensationalizing and bias. mosc was right; there's no way to have a conversation here. I know EMTP has blocked me, but his trolling and misrepresentation of facts is just outta control here.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Jul 09, 2014 10:40 pm UTC

Is there a way to tell if someone blocked you? Besides a lack of responses from them?

User avatar
Vahir
Posts: 456
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 7:20 pm UTC
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby Vahir » Wed Jul 09, 2014 11:41 pm UTC

If that person advertised that they did, which EMTP did at the beginning of this thread, I believe

yedidyak
Posts: 954
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 10:24 pm UTC
Location: Israel

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby yedidyak » Thu Jul 10, 2014 6:12 am UTC

Almost overslept this morning. Luckily Hamas were good enough to wake me up with sirens and explosions. There's a major road accident caused by the siren just near me now.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10336
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby addams » Thu Jul 10, 2014 6:27 am UTC

yedidyak wrote:Almost overslept this morning. Luckily Hamas were good enough to wake me up with sirens and explosions. There's a major road accident caused by the siren just near me now.

yedidyak?
Is it like being in any large dangerous city?
Or; Is the reason for the noise and inconvenience disturbing?

We had a bit of a war here.
There were loads of helicopters.

Not many explosions.
It was a different kind of war.

Somewhat undeclared.
They called it CAMP.

Each little Campaign gets a cute little name.
Yours get names too. More dates with you.

The Six Day War. I don't know anything about it.
Only; I thought Six Days was a fairly short War.

Jeeze. Most wars are hardly off the ground in six days.
It seem the six day war was a prelude for things to come.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War

Such a long time, ago.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

yedidyak
Posts: 954
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 10:24 pm UTC
Location: Israel

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby yedidyak » Thu Jul 10, 2014 7:51 am UTC

For the first time this round, Fatah (the 'moderate' party of Mahmoud Abbas, caretaker President of the PA) claimed responsibility ofr rocket and mortar attacks on their official FaceBook page (Arabic).

Mambrino
Posts: 388
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:45 pm UTC
Location: No we don't have polar bears. Except in zoos.

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby Mambrino » Thu Jul 10, 2014 1:01 pm UTC

Looking at the thread, this blog post seems relevant

Duck of Minerva wrote:Justice, Peace and Finger-Pointing

by Charli Carpenter on 2014-07-10 in Duck- Leave a reply

This is a guest post by Ari Kohen, Associate Professor of Political Science at University of Nebraska-Lincoln. He blogs at Running Chicken and tweets @kohenari.

palestineAs I write this, Twitter and Facebook inform me that air raid sirens are going off in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, as well as several cities and towns closer to the Gaza Strip, while Israeli forces have launched air strikes against Gaza and are considering the mobilization of as many as 40,000 reservists for a possible ground incursion. The numbers of dead, wounded, and terrorized are mounting.

This most recent escalation comes on the heels of the kidnapping and murder of three Israeli teens in the West Bank, and also the official and unofficial retaliation by both the Israeli government and a small group of Jewish extremists. But while this is the proximate cause, the truth is that this week’s bloodshed and terror is rooted in the simmering hatred, prejudice, and distrust that has characterized the peace process almost since its inception.

While leaders have in the past at least made a pretense of working toward the goals set out way back in the 1990s, the Israeli government under Netanyahu and the deeply-divided Palestinian leadership have both made clear their unwillingness to compromise. Decades of occupation, radicalism, and foot-dragging have brought us to the point where leaders and citizens now find themselves, committed to verbally endorsing a peace process that has no chance of ever turning into actual peace. At the very least, peace would require an end to – rather than the continued expansion of – Israeli settlements in the West Bank, just as it would require Hamas and its supporters to unequivocally give up on the dream of a map of the region that doesn’t include Israel. But peace would also require giving up on the idea that justice is bound up with affixing blame and with retaliation, giving up on the whole ridiculous notion that everything will be sorted out properly once everyone finally understands whose fault it all really is. And this is where we might have the most trouble of all, because partisans of one side or the other persist in proclaiming the obvious justice of their cause and the utter inhumanity of the other. Even as I write this, I’m well aware that I’ll be called a Zionist apologist and warmonger because I haven’t properly situated all of the violence within the proper context of Israel’s colonialist and militarist oppression of the Palestinian people. And, just as certain, I’ll be called a self-hating Jew or a hopeless relativist because I’m blaming Israel for defending herself against those who seek her utter destruction and drawing false equivalencies between the generally good Israelis and the generally evil Palestinians.

(...)

Because until it’s less important to point fingers at the people responsible for the previous atrocity than it is to ensure that there is no next atrocity, we’ll just keep perpetuating the same violence we’ve seen for decades.


Tyndmyr made a point about "world of fantasy" and not tolerating intolerance, but the current ways of "not tolerating" are ... less than stellar when it comes to actually reduring intolerance or the violence stemming from it; actually, they're just thinly veiled intolerance. (What purpose demolishing suspects' house serve, other than a fantasy of justice called 'revenge'? Or maintaining a ceasefire which includes not stopping the populace you govern shooting missiles into neighboring country, even if missiles usually don't hit anywhere?)

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Jul 10, 2014 1:24 pm UTC

leady wrote:
Diadem wrote:Is "pro-active pacification" a euphemism for genocide?

I am not asking to be snide. I am honestly unsure what you mean by the term.


I was being deliberately vague but it would be one of the outcomes deemed unacceptable in the modern world (brutal occupation, deliberate population by force etc) but the mainstay of most wars throughout history.


Everyone always condemns such things until they don't. They are, of course, undesirable outcomes, but they still happen even in the modern world.

Also, anyone who paints only one party as the aggressors, always, has given up on attempting to understand the situation, and is merely cheering for a team.

nitePhyyre
Posts: 1280
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 10:31 am UTC

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby nitePhyyre » Thu Jul 10, 2014 8:56 pm UTC

Izawwlgood wrote:The problem with the event you are bringing up is that Hamas did nothing to prevent rocket fire from Gaza, and Israel, not surprisingly, responded to the rocket fire.

But sure, Israel 'broke the ceasefire with Hamas'. Because if you have a peace accord with your neighbor, and his friends keep coming over to his place and throwing fireworks from his yard into yours, it's totally a dick move on your part to throw some back into his yard, amiright. Especially rich when your neighbor then cries that all he wanted was peace.
Yes. That is totally and unquestionably a dick move. A huge dick move. Like an I-have-a-tiny-penis-in-dick-wagging-contest kind of dick move. Your implication that it isn't is staggering. Now go reread Mambrino's post. Reread it and take it to heart.

EMTP wrote:
Vahir wrote:
EMTP wrote:When two armed forces confront each other, whether its natives vs colonists, foreign troops vs rebels, or what have you, the smart thing is to use neutral terms for comparable actions on either side. Abusing language to reflect your dehumanization of your enemies or to cast your, very similar, behavior in a radically different light is stupid.
Don't look at me, I'm just leaving that there.
Feel free. Saying that both sides have committed cruel and violent acts doesn't mean we need to ignore the vast difference in scale between the crimes of Israel and the crimes of Hamas. Nor the fact that Israel instigated the violence.
You are entirely correct. Using neutral language has nothing to do with denying that both sides have committed atrocities. We can use neutral language and still deride the Israelis for using a disproportionate amount of force.

But then, why don't you? If you were honest when you say "the smart thing is to use neutral terms" then it would be possible, easy even, for you to have use more neutral terms than "Settler terrorism" or "settler pogroms".

Wouldn't "Settler program" be more neutral? Yes, yes it would. Would "Illegal Israeli settlements" be more neutral AND more accepted as accurate than either "Settler terrorism", "settler pogroms", or "Settler program"? Dear god, fuck yes, it would. But you didn't go with the neutral language, did you? Nope, not at all!

I guess with your declaration that using neutral language would be the smart thing to do, and you refusing to ever use neutral language, is your way of announcing to the world that you aren't smart?
Now go reread Mambrino's post. Reread it and take it to heart.


So, apparently, this is happening?
Image
Isrealis bring chairs at hilltop Sderot overlooking Bombing at Gaza,enjoying, clapping.
https://twitter.com/Shahidmasooddr/stat ... 4836472832

Not sure if I'm buying it.
sourmìlk wrote:Monopolies are not when a single company controls the market for a single product.

You don't become great by trying to be great. You become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard you become great in the process.

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby Izawwlgood » Thu Jul 10, 2014 9:02 pm UTC

nitePhyyre wrote:Yes. That is totally and unquestionably a dick move. A huge dick move. Like an I-have-a-tiny-penis-in-dick-wagging-contest kind of dick move. Your implication that it isn't is staggering. Now go reread Mambrino's post. Reread it and take it to heart.
yes, and your black and white narrative it's easy to see why context is irrelevant. Try rereading the very first sentence to the part you quoted back at me.

nitePhyyre wrote:So, apparently, this is happening?
Oh, ok, we're back to the territory of posting unsubstantiated examples of personal racism as proof that the other side is horrible and racist. Riveting contribution.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4585
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby LaserGuy » Thu Jul 10, 2014 10:27 pm UTC

nitePhyyre wrote:Wouldn't "Settler program" be more neutral? Yes, yes it would. Would "Illegal Israeli settlements" be more neutral AND more accepted as accurate than either "Settler terrorism", "settler pogroms", or "Settler program"? Dear god, fuck yes, it would. But you didn't go with the neutral language, did you? Nope, not at all!


'Illegal Israeli settlements' does not fully account for the issue of significant settler violence against the Palestinians.

User avatar
EMTP
Posts: 1556
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 7:39 pm UTC
Location: Elbow deep in (mostly) other people's blood.

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby EMTP » Thu Jul 10, 2014 10:58 pm UTC

I guess with your declaration that using neutral language would be the smart thing to do, and you refusing to ever use neutral language, is your way of announcing to the world that you aren't smart?


What Laserguy said. The settlements are obviously a crime, but I was referring specifically to settlers terrorizing the Palestinians; attacks on schoolchildren walking to school, destroying olive groves, beating farmers, burning mosques, poisoning wells, and so on [1]. Burning teenagers alive.

Now, given that I have you dead to right on the facts, I could certainly be just as personally insulting as you just were. Perhaps you'd like that, and the thread could be locked again in a couple pages, and you wouldn't have to confront pictures like these:

Image

Or statements like these:

Goyim were born only to serve us. Without that, they have no place in the world; only to serve the People of Israel,” he said during a public discussion of what kind of work non-Jews are allowed to perform on Shabbat.

"Why are gentiles needed? They will work, they will plow, they will reap. We will sit like an effendi and eat," he said to some laughter.

Yosef, the spiritual leader of the Shas Party and the former chief Sephardi rabbi of Israel, also said that the lives of non-Jews are protected in order to prevent financial loss to Jews.

"With gentiles, it will be like any person: They need to die, but God will give them longevity. Why? Imagine that one’s donkey would die, they’d lose their money. This is his servant. That’s why he gets a long life, to work well for this Jew,” said the rabbi, who recently turned 90.



. . . but I'm not going to help you sabotage the thread. Try again.

Vahir wrote:If that person advertised that they did, which EMTP did at the beginning of this thread, I believe


I didn't "advertise" it; I mentioned it, once, to avoid precisely this confusion.

Tyndmyr made a point about "world of fantasy" and not tolerating intolerance, but the current ways of "not tolerating" are ... less than stellar when it comes to actually reduring intolerance or the violence stemming from it; actually, they're just thinly veiled intolerance. (What purpose demolishing suspects' house serve, other than a fantasy of justice called 'revenge'? Or maintaining a ceasefire which includes not stopping the populace you govern shooting missiles into neighboring country, even if missiles usually don't hit anywhere?)


Not to rain on your "a pox on both their houses" parade, but this complaint is pretty vacuous: "not stopping the populace you govern shooting missiles into neighboring country, even if missiles usually don't hit anywhere?"

Recall that in a half decade of direct military occupation following the birth of the Gazan rocket industry, the Israeli army was never able to halt rocket fire from Gaza. So you are complaining that the forces of Hamas are not accomplishing something that the entire might of the IDF was never able to accomplish; stopping rocket fire entirely.

Prior to Israel's stepped up attacks on the Palestinians, the number of rockets fired by renegade Palestinian factions in Gaza was tiny --less than a hundred all told in 2013, and in that entire year, not one Israeli was hurt by rocket fire. (38 Palestinians were killed by Israeli forces that year, mostly in the West Bank, where six Israelis also died.)

For comparison, in 2005, the last year the IDF directly occupied the Gaza Strip, 1255 rockets were fired into Israel.

So a government which the state of Israel does not recognize, in fact denounces as terrorists beyond the pale, and actively hobbles via a military blockade nevertheless succeeded in cutting rocket fire by >90%, compared to the best efforts of the IDF when they ruled Gaza. If Israel wants to do better than that, they should try making peace.

-------------------------------------

See also: "U.S. State Department defines settler violence as terrorism" -- Haaretz, August 2012. I guess the State Department is also dumb!

First and last warning - keep the posts in this thread laser-focused on the Israel/Palestine conflict. The generalised ramblings of disavowed religious leaders do not constitute constructive discussion. -Hawk
"Reasonable – that is, human – men will always be capable of compromise, but men who have dehumanized themselves by becoming the blind worshipers of an idea or an ideal are fanatics whose devotion to abstractions makes them the enemies of life."
-- Alan Watts, "The Way of Zen"

User avatar
Paul in Saudi
Posts: 262
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 12:52 pm UTC
Location: Dammam, Saudi Arabia

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby Paul in Saudi » Fri Jul 11, 2014 10:39 am UTC

Butcher's bill so far:
Palestinians killed, about 80
Israelis killed about 0



(There were no Israeli deaths from rocket attacks in 2013. I cannot find a figure for 2014, but I do not recall one. I would appreciate being educated.)

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Jul 11, 2014 11:08 am UTC

It's now about 100 to 0, but what's your point? Morally speaking, attempted murder and murder are the same; Israel has the capacity to kill every last Gazan, even with conventional weapons alone, but prefers to target the people responsible for the attacks. Hamas has more or less stated that it targets every last person it can, but doesn't have the capacity to do so.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby morriswalters » Fri Jul 11, 2014 11:18 am UTC

Why do you think that Hamas would do that?

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Jul 11, 2014 11:22 am UTC


User avatar
Paul in Saudi
Posts: 262
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 12:52 pm UTC
Location: Dammam, Saudi Arabia

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby Paul in Saudi » Fri Jul 11, 2014 11:37 am UTC

CorruptUser wrote:It's now about 100 to 0, but what's your point? Morally speaking, attempted murder and murder are the same; Israel has the capacity to kill every last Gazan, even with conventional weapons alone, but prefers to target the people responsible for the attacks. Hamas has more or less stated that it targets every last person it can, but doesn't have the capacity to do so.


I just thought it was interesting.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Jul 11, 2014 12:28 pm UTC

I think this gives an accurate if brief summary of the whole conflict.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby morriswalters » Fri Jul 11, 2014 12:34 pm UTC

I know the party line. But what is the goal? It would be hard to convince me that it is about killing citizens of Irael, given that they can't. So what's the point?

User avatar
Hawknc
Oompa Loompa of SCIENCE!
Posts: 6986
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:14 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby Hawknc » Fri Jul 11, 2014 12:38 pm UTC

Guys, general note that this thread will have much more moderator attention for the immediate future, so please keep discussion relevant and civil.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Jul 11, 2014 12:40 pm UTC

Their stated goal is to establish a (Sunni) theocracy in the region, with everyone else either forced to convert to their particular brand of Sunni-Islam or Dhimmi status or dead. The extermination of every Jew in the region is more a means to an end, but even that end is a dystopia.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby morriswalters » Fri Jul 11, 2014 12:59 pm UTC

If their goal is to establish a Sunni theocracy, the question I'm asking is how does firing missles further that goal? They don't kill anyone.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri Jul 11, 2014 1:01 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:If their goal is to establish a Sunni theocracy, the question I'm asking is how does firing missles further that goal? They don't kill anyone.


They are trying to kill people. Yes, the rockets are...fairly ineffective at this, and it's a fight they cannot possibly win in this way. They are doing so anyway.

That's the trouble with religiously motivated causes. Merely being doomed to failure may not dissuade them from actually doing it.

So, the situation continues until Palestinians get over this bit of nonsense.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Israel/Palestine discussion

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Jul 11, 2014 1:51 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:If their goal is to establish a Sunni theocracy, the question I'm asking is how does firing missles further that goal? They don't kill anyone.


It creates stress and economic damage in Israel, reduces tourism, etc, which they hope bankrupts Israel and thus easier to destroy. The point isn't to kill directly, though that's a 'bonus'.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests