Arab-Israeli conflict Q&A

[Lipush]

1) Is Israel oppressing Palestine?

No. You cannot opress something that doesn't exist

2) Is Israel killing Palestinian citizens out of malice?

No. Innocents die in war, that cannot be helped. The only ones Israel kills in ''malice'' are the ones acting to kill Jews.

3) Does Israel have a right to defend itself?

No one can say Israel has no right to defend itself, you're not Gods to decide another human have no right of self defense.

4) Is Israel evil?

No.

5) Does Israel deserve to be funded by the United States?

That's an American issue

6) Do you think Palestine might be oppressing its own citizens?

Yes, Hamas was elected democratically, but they haunt and kill those in their terrotories who resist their ruling

7) Do you think Palestine cares about its own people?

Hardly. They use them as human shields and the money arriving goes to tunnles and weapons instead of the people who need it

8) Should Israel be evicted from their homeland?

Irrelevant.

9) Should Israel revert to its 1967 borders?

Not in todays reality.

10) Do you think Israel cares about Palestine? Yes or No? Why?

Israel should care first thing for itself

 

[Billo_Really]

Ooooh, this is going to be fun!

1) Is Israel oppressing Palestine?

No. You cannot opress something that doesn't exist

Playing a little bullshit game of semantics, doesn't change the fact that you are oppressing an entire population of people that don't deserve this treatment.

2) Is Israel killing Palestinian citizens out of malice?

No. Innocents die in war, that cannot be helped. The only ones Israel kills in ''malice'' are the ones acting to kill Jews.

Then why do you drop 2000 pound bombs that take out entire neighborhoods? Why do you deliberately murder entire families? Why do you deliberately murder elected officials you are negotiating peace with?

3) Does Israel have a right to defend itself?

No one can say Israel has no right to defend itself, you're not Gods to decide another human have no right of self defense.

And you have no right to say what can go in to (and out of) Gaza. Or where a Palestinian can walk in the West Bank. You're not God! But according to international law, an occupational force cannot claim self defense.

4) Is Israel evil?

No.

Then why do you shoot at people fishing and farming? Because that is evil.

5) Does Israel deserve to be funded by the United States?

That's an American issue

And as an American, I say no.

6) Do you think Palestine might be oppressing its own citizens?

Yes, Hamas was elected democratically, but they haunt and kill those in their terrotories who resist their ruling

Said the pot to the kettle.

7) Do you think Palestine cares about its own people?

Hardly. They use them as human shields and the money arriving goes to tunnles and weapons instead of the people who need it

They care more about their people than Israel cares about human rights.

8) Should Israel be evicted from their homeland?

Irrelevant.

No. They should be evicted from the OPT.

9) Should Israel revert to its 1967 borders?

Not in todays reality.

Israel has no other choice.

10) Do you think Israel cares about Palestine? Yes or No? Why?

Israel should care first thing for itself

If Israel cared about itself, it wouldn't trash the memory of Holocaust victims with its Nazi-esque foreign policy.

 

[Coyote]

Mexican children do not.

Think about that for a moment, do their parents really care about them? Why would they send them across our border alone, or put them in the hands of shady figures? No.

Because they care A GREAT DEAL. Because life where they are is so dangerous or so desperate they are willing to try anything to give their children a chance to survive and have a better future. It's easy to judge, because we - you and I - live in a nation that is largely very safe, with a working and accountable legal system and system of justice. We don't have to worry that our children might be kidnapped by our police and elected officials, and given to drug cartels to be murdered.

You are the one who claimed another's source was biased and then presented and equally biased source.

So, you can't really call my source biased then. You made an automatic judgement about my source without vetting the claims it made.

Oh, I can call it biased: American Thinker - RationalWiki The fact that they give article space to notorious bigots like Pamela Gellar says all I need to know about it. Now, can you tell me why you poo-poo Tinmore's source and then offer up tripe like this in return?

All of the above - yes. But we, as a nation - pick and choose. I like to think, and do think, that we Americans are a generous people.

I beg to differ. Generosity is indiscriminate. So is compassion. But such compassion cannot come at the risk of the benefactor.

Compassion CAN come at the risk of the benefactor. And does. Look at the doctors and nurses going to treat ebola patients in west Africa. Look at Doctors without Borders. When people start trying to define compassion by placing limits on it - it's usually a sign that their compassion is only reserved for certain groups or instances. When you talk about nations being compassionate - they really aren't. That's not their purpose. Their purpose is to protect their borders and ensure the survival of their people and ideologies and that almost always involves acts we would not consider compassionate at all. Compassion is a quality of individuals not states.

I think true compassion would NOT draw such distinctions. People in need are people in need. Don't you think?

There are people in need, and then there people who want to kill you or take advantage of you, that is as far as this thread is concerned.

[/QUOTE]

That's a simplistic label. For example among the Palestinians are people in need. Among the Palestinians are people who want to kill you. Your logic would place the entire People in the latter group, without looking further. There are many charities and human rights groups that do not draw distinctions.

 

[Coyote]

Coming from someone who wouldn't do any research on the claims before dismissing the source. I gave PF Tinmore that courtesy.

Oh, I've done a ton of research on that subject. I also read the entire article you linked. It made the same bullshit claim many on the pro-Israeli side make, that these are "disputed territories".

The entire world has considered them "occupied territories" since 1967. They are territories Israel seized during the 6-day war. You cannot hold onto land seized in a war. You cannot change the demographics of an area under occupation.

There is no mechanism in international law that would change an "occupied" territory, into a "disputed" one. The only thing you can do with an occupation, is to end it.

So yes, the settlements are illegal.

Politicians want to call it "disputed" territories but the courts make clear it's "occupied" territories.

 

[Lipush]

Ooooh, this is going to be fun!

1) Is Israel oppressing Palestine?

No. You cannot opress something that doesn't exist

Playing a little bullshit game of semantics, doesn't change the fact that you are oppressing an entire population of people that don't deserve this treatment.

2) Is Israel killing Palestinian citizens out of malice?

No. Innocents die in war, that cannot be helped. The only ones Israel kills in ''malice'' are the ones acting to kill Jews.

Then why do you drop 2000 pound bombs that take out entire neighborhoods? Why do you deliberately murder entire families? Why do you deliberately murder elected officials you are negotiating peace with?

3) Does Israel have a right to defend itself?

No one can say Israel has no right to defend itself, you're not Gods to decide another human have no right of self defense.

And you have no right to say what can go in to (and out of) Gaza. Or where a Palestinian can walk in the West Bank. You're not God! But according to international law, an occupational force cannot claim self defense.

4) Is Israel evil?

No.

Then why do you shoot at people fishing and farming? Because that is evil.

5) Does Israel deserve to be funded by the United States?

That's an American issue

And as an American, I say no.

6) Do you think Palestine might be oppressing its own citizens?

Yes, Hamas was elected democratically, but they haunt and kill those in their terrotories who resist their ruling

Said the pot to the kettle.

7) Do you think Palestine cares about its own people?

Hardly. They use them as human shields and the money arriving goes to tunnles and weapons instead of the people who need it

They care more about their people than Israel cares about human rights.

8) Should Israel be evicted from their homeland?

Irrelevant.

No. They should be evicted from the OPT.

9) Should Israel revert to its 1967 borders?

Not in todays reality.

Israel has no other choice.

10) Do you think Israel cares about Palestine? Yes or No? Why?

Israel should care first thing for itself

If Israel cared about itself, it wouldn't trash the memory of Holocaust victims with its Nazi-esque foreign policy.

I don't really care what you think, so....

 

[Saigon]

Is Israel oppressing Palestine? Yes or No? Why?

Yes, by holding the Occupied Territories.

2) Is Israel killing Palestinian citizens out of malice? Yes or No? Why?

Malice no, but force of habit, yes. It's become a self-fulfilling prophecy, in a sense.

3) Does Israel have a right to defend itself? Yes or No? Why?

Yes.

4) Is Israel evil? Yes or No? Why?

No.

5) Does Israel deserve to be funded by the United States? Yes or No? Why?

Yes...but with far tigher limitations than Obama has imposed. The US should tie funding to successful negotiations within a limited time frame.

6) Do you think Palestine might be oppressing its own citizens? Yes or No? Why?

No...but Hamas is not fit to govern a democracy.

7) Do you think Palestine cares about its own people? Yes or No? Why?

Yes.

8) Should Israel be evicted from their homeland? Yes or No? Why?

No.

9) Should Israel revert to its 1967 borders? Yes or No? Why?

No...but they should trade for parts of the West Bank that could not easily be returned, e.g. Gilo.

10) Do you think Israel cares about Palestine? Yes or No? Why?

No, I don't. I think Israel imagines that in 20 years there will be no Palestine.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

The fact that it may be in the best security interests of Israel to not allow free movement of Palestinians does not change that it is oppressing them by doing so.

.

Removing all responsibility as you are doing such that there are absolutely no consequences for Arab actions and behavior is the stuff of sophistry and apologia.

Instead of just trotting out some stale, simplistic tripe about "oppression", you should evaluate both parties with less obvious bias. You divorce cause from effect here, as it is the behavior of Arabs that necessitates the responses to them. Without such behavior, there would be no "oppression".

Only a very delusion anarchist would argue that placing any limits on the ability of extremely hostile people to do whatever they ******* well please is an act of "oppression".

 

[docmauser1]

Is Israel oppressing Palestine? Yes or No? Why?Yes, by holding the Occupied Territories.

It's a palistanian occupation©. Palistanians occupy anything others hold, of course.

 

[Phoenall]

And Palestine falls down on defined territory as it has never agreed mutual borders with any of its neighbours. Isreal has more defined borders than the state of Palestine that has only existed since 1988

Israeli lie. Palestine has had international borders since 1924. They were defined by post war treaties.

The produce the treaties signed by a Palestinian representative that defines the borders of the state of Palestine, not the mandate of Palestine which is a completely different thing

Britain was the trustee for the territory. They defined Palestine's international borders through post war treaties.

WRONG as in 1924 the land was the MANDATE OF PALESTINE and that is what the treaty defined, it did not define the nation or state of Palestine.

Keep trying one day you could get something correct

Well actually its the Mandate FOR Palestine which is a legal and administrative instrument, not a treaty. Keep trying, one day you could get something correct.

And the treaties set out the borders of said MANDATE, not the borders of a state or nation

 

[P F Tinmore]

Israeli lie. Palestine has had international borders since 1924. They were defined by post war treaties.

The produce the treaties signed by a Palestinian representative that defines the borders of the state of Palestine, not the mandate of Palestine which is a completely different thing

Britain was the trustee for the territory. They defined Palestine's international borders through post war treaties.

WRONG as in 1924 the land was the MANDATE OF PALESTINE and that is what the treaty defined, it did not define the nation or state of Palestine.

Keep trying one day you could get something correct

Well actually its the Mandate FOR Palestine which is a legal and administrative instrument, not a treaty. Keep trying, one day you could get something correct.

And the treaties set out the borders of said MANDATE, not the borders of a state or nation

Not true!

Palestine and its international borders were still there after the mandate left Palestine.

 

[Coyote]

So try putting yourself into the perspective of a Palestinian. Not a militant extremist, just a guy living his life - and try to imagine the Israel-Palestine conflict from that perspective. I'm curious to see what you come up with.

And while I contemplate a response to this challenge, I also challenge you to put yourself in the shoes of an everyday common Israeli. Please let me know what you come up with.

Wait. Nevermind. Let's say I am a Palestinian.

I am oppressed by my government. My rights are more suppressed by my government than by Israel. The toll the conflict has taken on me personally is terrible. I want peace rather than having thousands of my brethren slaughtered in a futile struggle. Day in and day out I wonder if it is even worth it.

Or

I am proud of my government. My rights are suppressed by those filthy Zionist pigs who don't even belong where they are. They invaded my home, and I want Israel to die, I want Jews to die. Peace is the last thing on my mind. The sacrifice of my countrymen are for the betterment of the fight against Israel. Day in and day out, I look forward to how many ways we can further bring the State of Israel down by provoking them into responding. My freedom is worth the life of each and every Palestinian who has died in Allah's name fighting for it. Their deaths bring us closer to driving Israel into the sea.

Or

You're a Palestinian father, with 3 young daughters. Unemployment is very high and jobs are erratic. You worry about how you are going to feed your family, whether the electricity is going to go out on you. You also worry about how you are going to educate your children when war keeps interrupting the system. The girls are bright and your oldest as stated she is going to be a doctor. You want that for her. If you're in Gaza, you've been through a summer of war and the landscape as you knew it is drastically different. Maybe your house was one of the one's damaged and you're living squashed in a tiny apartment with relatives. Streets are damaged and dangerous rubble is everywhere but that is where your daughters have to play and no one seems to be doing much to get the infrastructure back in order. You are frustrated with your political leaders and might be thinking about ways to get out of Gaza and leave behind the eternal desperation, instability, danger, and lack of any progress towards any sustainable resolution to conflict. But leaviing legally is difficult (and maybe impossible) and leaving illegally dangerous. Your nephew is a hot head and you're worried he might be involved with terrorists and you don't want to see him killed. Most of all though, you're thinking of what you can do to earn money and take care of your family and try to establish some normalcy.

Or

You're an Israeli mother with a son and daughter. Your son is in the IDF and you're proud of him but constantly worried he will end up being killed. You've been hearing about the increased knife and vehicle attacks on civilians in the news and now you are wondering how safe you are in public places or on the street corner so you look at Arabs with suspician and anger. This is your country - you shouldn't have to worry about these things. You should be safe. Your daughter is finishing highschool and starting to think about a career, you are hoping she will choose medicine but she wants to be an engineer. You complain to your friend about the high cost of food and scarcity of affordable housing. You'd like to move out of the small apartment you live in, but you can't afford to. Your daughter is talking about taking a month abroad after she graduates, maybe going to California where she has an aunt and some cousins. You're thinking that might not be a bad idea. At least she would be away from the dangers that seem to be coming from all directions.

Or maybe you are this guy:

Izzeldin Abuelaish - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Abulaish was born and raised in the Jabalia refugee camp. He received his elementary, preparatory and secondary education in the refugee camp schools.


Abuelaish received a scholarship to study medicine in Cairo, Egypt and then a diploma in Obstetrics and Gynecology from the University of London.[1]


From 1997–2002 completed a residency in OB/Gyn at the Soroka University hospital in Beer Sheva, Israel, followed by a subspecialty in fetal medicine in Italy and Belgium; then a master's degree in Public Health (Health Policy and Management) from Harvard University.[2]


He has written a book named I Shall Not Hate.


He founded the "Daughters for Life Foundation" in memory of three of his daughters, who were killed by Israeli tank fire during the Gaza War. The organisation provides scholarship awards to encourage young women to pursue their studies at universities in Palestine, Israel, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt and Syria.[3]


Dr. Abuelaish was the first Palestinian doctor to receive a staff position at an Israeli hospital, where he treated both Israeli and Palestinian patients. Immediately before the war he was a researcher at the Sheba Hospital in Tel Aviv[4] and already an important figure in Israeli-Palestinian relations.[5] The death of his children strengthened his resolve to promote reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians.[6] He is currently Associate Professor of Global Health at the University of Toronto.[7]


In February 2013, he attended the Karachi Literature Festival in Pakistan where he narrated the events surrounding the death of his daughters killed in the Israeli airstrike. According to The Express Tribune, "there was hardly anyone in the audience who did not choke or wipe away a silent tear while listening to Palestinian doctor and author Izzeldin Abuelaish..."[8]
​

 

[Phoenall]

Article 42 of the 1899 Hague convention states, "Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation applies only to the territory where such authority is established, and in a position to assert itself." The key phrase here is "able to assert itself". The IAF controls the air over Gaza, the Israeli Navy controls the sea around Gaza and the IDF not onlt prevents ingress and egrees but has carried out armed "punitive" incursions into Gaza. The Gaza strip is surrunded by "security fences/walls" with regularly spaced watchtowers along it. That's "placed under the authority of the hostile army" by any resonable definition and that's what the ICJ thought too.

Superseded by the Geneva conventions of 1949, so this no longer applies, but if you want to use that treaty then Israel owns all of gaza and the west bank as spoils of war

 

[Phoenall]

Moreover, if Russia or China started lobbing ICBMs at us, we wouldn't tolerate that much either, now would we?

And if the USA occupied Russian or Chinese territory? What then?

Then it would be as legal as Israel's occupation of the west bank

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore you didn't respond to the crucial part of my post earlier..I'll get down to my point.
Annexing occupied territory is one thing, so the following question comes up;
Is the WB occupied or is it part of the state of Israel?
The lately-announced- wait there was an official announcement? it is necessary- Virtual state of Palestine hold no territory.
While Israel is the governing rule of the WB, there is no doubt about that except for the areas Israel allowed the PA to govern.
Lets ask again, who was it occupied from and when?

The West Bank is Israeli occupied Palestinian territory.

And when did this take place ?

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore you didn't respond to the crucial part of my post earlier..I'll get down to my point.
Annexing occupied territory is one thing, so the following question comes up;
Is the WB occupied or is it part of the state of Israel?
The lately-announced- wait there was an official announcement? it is necessary- Virtual state of Palestine hold no territory.
While Israel is the governing rule of the WB, there is no doubt about that except for the areas Israel allowed the PA to govern.
Lets ask again, who was it occupied from and when?

The West Bank is Israeli occupied Palestinian territory.

And when did this take place ?

1967

 

[Phoenall]

The produce the treaties signed by a Palestinian representative that defines the borders of the state of Palestine, not the mandate of Palestine which is a completely different thing

Britain was the trustee for the territory. They defined Palestine's international borders through post war treaties.

WRONG as in 1924 the land was the MANDATE OF PALESTINE and that is what the treaty defined, it did not define the nation or state of Palestine.

Keep trying one day you could get something correct

Well actually its the Mandate FOR Palestine which is a legal and administrative instrument, not a treaty. Keep trying, one day you could get something correct.

And the treaties set out the borders of said MANDATE, not the borders of a state or nation

Not true!

Palestine and its international borders were still there after the mandate left Palestine.

Which are the borders of the MANDATE FOE PALESTINE and not the STATE OF PALESTINE. When the mandate dissolved in 1988 the borders of the MANDATE FOR PALESTINE became the BORDERS OF ISRAEL. Palestine has still to negotiate its borders under the UN charter, UN resolutions and CUSTOMARY INTERNATIONAL LAW.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Britain was the trustee for the territory. They defined Palestine's international borders through post war treaties.

WRONG as in 1924 the land was the MANDATE OF PALESTINE and that is what the treaty defined, it did not define the nation or state of Palestine.

Keep trying one day you could get something correct

Well actually its the Mandate FOR Palestine which is a legal and administrative instrument, not a treaty. Keep trying, one day you could get something correct.

And the treaties set out the borders of said MANDATE, not the borders of a state or nation

Not true!

Palestine and its international borders were still there after the mandate left Palestine.

Which are the borders of the MANDATE FOE PALESTINE and not the STATE OF PALESTINE. When the mandate dissolved in 1988 the borders of the MANDATE FOR PALESTINE became the BORDERS OF ISRAEL. Palestine has still to negotiate its borders under the UN charter, UN resolutions and CUSTOMARY INTERNATIONAL LAW.

Links?

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore you didn't respond to the crucial part of my post earlier..I'll get down to my point.
Annexing occupied territory is one thing, so the following question comes up;
Is the WB occupied or is it part of the state of Israel?
The lately-announced- wait there was an official announcement? it is necessary- Virtual state of Palestine hold no territory.
While Israel is the governing rule of the WB, there is no doubt about that except for the areas Israel allowed the PA to govern.
Lets ask again, who was it occupied from and when?

The West Bank is Israeli occupied Palestinian territory.

And when did this take place ?

1967

When it was Jordan, so not Palestinian until 1988. So once again who was it from and when if Palestine the state has not been created. We have already established your borders are those of Palestine the MANDATE, and on other threads that the state of Palestine has no land or borders until it negotiates them. So who was the land occupied from and when ?

 

[Phoenall]

WRONG as in 1924 the land was the MANDATE OF PALESTINE and that is what the treaty defined, it did not define the nation or state of Palestine.

Keep trying one day you could get something correct

Well actually its the Mandate FOR Palestine which is a legal and administrative instrument, not a treaty. Keep trying, one day you could get something correct.

And the treaties set out the borders of said MANDATE, not the borders of a state or nation

Not true!

Palestine and its international borders were still there after the mandate left Palestine.

Which are the borders of the MANDATE FOE PALESTINE and not the STATE OF PALESTINE. When the mandate dissolved in 1988 the borders of the MANDATE FOR PALESTINE became the BORDERS OF ISRAEL. Palestine has still to negotiate its borders under the UN charter, UN resolutions and CUSTOMARY INTERNATIONAL LAW.

Links?

Look at the ones you use to say Palestine has borders and you will see they deal with the mandate. As for negotiating borders look at the UN charter and the resolution accepting Palestine as a landless nation

 

[montelatici]

Article 42 of the 1899 Hague convention states, "Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation applies only to the territory where such authority is established, and in a position to assert itself." The key phrase here is "able to assert itself". The IAF controls the air over Gaza, the Israeli Navy controls the sea around Gaza and the IDF not onlt prevents ingress and egrees but has carried out armed "punitive" incursions into Gaza. The Gaza strip is surrunded by "security fences/walls" with regularly spaced watchtowers along it. That's "placed under the authority of the hostile army" by any resonable definition and that's what the ICJ thought too.

Superseded by the Geneva conventions of 1949, so this no longer applies, but if you want to use that treaty then Israel owns all of gaza and the west bank as spoils of war

Always making things up psychopath. They are recognized as Occupied Territories by every nation in the world.