Is it Possible for Israel and Palestine to Peacefully Coexist?

[Lisa558]

Umh…you do realize, right, that your own responses are also one-sided?

It sounds like you are using what happened historically as an excuse to justify doing the same today. Are you?



It’s a fail because you are justifying doing something terrible to people today because other people back then did something terrible.

Lisa quote:
2. As far as “ethnically cleansing” the Muslims in northern Gaza, two points:


Are you attempting to justify ethnic cleansing?

I don’t think I used the term “genocide-like”.

Your own bias and hatred is pretty clear here.

You’re missing a key point: the Muslims ethnically cleansed their countries of Jews due to pure hatred. The Jews are removing Muslims from northern Gaza so they can exterminate HAMAS with as few civilian casualties as possible.

There is no comparable here.

 

[Lisa558]

Umh…you do realize, right, that your own responses are also one-sided?

It sounds like you are using what happened historically as an excuse to justify doing the same today. Are you?



It’s a fail because you are justifying doing something terrible to people today because other people back then did something terrible.

Lisa quote:
2. As far as “ethnically cleansing” the Muslims in northern Gaza, two points:


Are you attempting to justify ethnic cleansing?

I don’t think I used the term “genocide-like”.

Your own bias and hatred is pretty clear here.

P.S. You did at one point describe what Israel is doing as “like a genocide” when you were called out for calling it an outright genocide.

 

[Coyote]

You’re missing a key point: the Muslims ethnically cleansed their countries of Jews due to pure hatred. The Jews are removing Muslims from northern Gaza so they can exterminate HAMAS with as few civilian casualties as possible.

There is no comparable here.

Is or is not ethnic cleansing an atrocity?

 

[Coyote]

P.S. You did at one point describe what Israel is doing as “like a genocide” when you were called out for calling it an outright genocide.

You are talking about a different conversation and a different context and throwing it into this one.

 

[Lisa558]

Is or is not ethnic cleansing an atrocity?

Of course, and that’s what the Arabs did to Jews throughout the Middle East - INCLUDING kicking them out of Gaza.

As I explained, what Israel is doing is not ethnic cleansing.

 

[Lisa558]

You are talking about a different conversation and a different context and throwing it into this one.

I’m pointing out your double standards.

 

[Shusha]

Are there really?

Yes. There are still military goals which have not yet been achieved. Hamas is still fighting from its (probably last) remaining areas of military capability, using the infrastructure it has built up over the past 20ish years. If Hamas is still fighting, then Hamas is not fully dismantled and the military goal remains unresolved.

If Hamas is benefitting from fighting from within military infrastructure, and it is, then that goal has also not been achieved.

And Liri. And Naama. And Kfir. And Ariel. And Shiri. And Karina. And Daniella. And Agam. And all the other hostages who remain in Gaza and are believed to be alive.

Do you disagree that these are military goals? Do you disagree that these have not been achieved?

 

[Shusha]

Destruction of crops, farmland and cattle are military objectives?

Oh come on, you are better than this. Are you suggesting that the Israelis drove their tanks a little too aggressively and should have been more mindful of the strawberries while they were being shot at? Or are you legitimately attempting to argue that Israel deliberately spent time and resources away from the fighting simply to engage in a strawberry massacre?

 

[Shusha]

Is or is not ethnic cleansing an atrocity?

It is indeed. Which is why one must be exceedingly careful not to accuse a State of committing it with little evidence and when there are more reasonable explanations.

One might also consider why the ICJ has the majority opinion that ethnic cleansing is perfectly acceptable (even required) if it is committed against Israelis (Jews).

 

[Coyote]

Yes. There are still military goals which have not yet been achieved. Hamas is still fighting from its (probably last) remaining areas of military capability, using the infrastructure it has built up over the past 20ish years. If Hamas is still fighting, then Hamas is not fully dismantled and the military goal remains unresolved.

Hamas has lost its leadership, killing Sinwar opened up an opportunity for a negotiated end to the conflict and fewer civilian and hostage deaths.

And here’s the thing about Hamas and Total Victory, which is essentially what I think you are talking about. You aren’t going to eliminate Hamas solely by military means. An IDF spokesman put it very succinctly when he stated “Hamas is an idea”. Looking at different asymmetric type conflicts around the world where a state is fighting a non state entity or movement….have there been any occasions where victory has been attained solely through military means? What is happening is happening now is no longer the destruction of Hamas but the destruction of Gaza.

If Hamas is benefitting from fighting from within military infrastructure, and it is, then that goal has also not been achieved.

And Liri. And Naama. And Kfir. And Ariel. And Shiri. And Karina. And Daniella. And Agam. And all the other hostages who remain in Gaza and are believed to be alive.

Do you disagree that these are military goals? Do you disagree that these have not been achieved?

I strongly disagree on this.

Israel has gone as far as it can, militarily, to free the hostages. A continued insistence on it as a military goal over negotiations means hostages are being sacrificed. The longer the military campaign goes, the fewer hostages remain alive to be rescued and in several cases the military campaign itself was inadvertently responsible for their deaths.

 

[Shusha]

Hamas has lost its leadership, killing Sinwar opened up an opportunity for a negotiated end to the conflict and fewer civilian and hostage deaths.

I don't think you understand the goal here. Its not a reset to October 6. Israel is dismantling Hamas. Entirely. Israel is disabling Hamas to such an extent that there is no chance of an October 7 attack again. Israel is not looking for "opportunities", it is demanding surrender.

And here’s the thing about Hamas and Total Victory, which is essentially what I think you are talking about. You aren’t going to eliminate Hamas solely by military means.

Nope. I don't buy that argument. Hamas can absolutely be rendered inoperable by military means. It can be kept inoperable by military means. The thinly disguised attempt at victim-blaming and making Israel responsible for the vile ideology held by the people of Gaza can also be reversed. It will take two generations, maybe more. But it can be done.

 

[Shusha]

I strongly disagree on this.

Israel has gone as far as it can, militarily, to free the hostages. A continued insistence on it as a military goal over negotiations means hostages are being sacrificed. The longer the military campaign goes, the fewer hostages remain alive to be rescued and in several cases the military campaign itself was inadvertently responsible for their deaths.

Again, I think we have a misunderstanding of goals. (Wait, no first we have a misunderstanding of responsibility. The taking of civilian hostages is the commission of an atrocity. The responsibility lies with Hamas and the people of Gaza who contributed.)

There is no more shallow understanding. Israel is no longer framing the goal as "what do we have to do to get these hostages back". (Otherwise known as "what rewards do we give those who commit atrocities against us"). Again, there is no going back to October 6. The primary goal, then, is to eliminate the expectation that taking hostages is a useful strategy.

 

[ding]

For the Rcord there was NO reply from either of the posters addressed in my previous post on pg 10, who both felt strongly but seemed pretty ignorant on the topic.
Again:


Rigby5, etc

You guys know me from posting in Science/Sci-Tech, and Env/Climate, but THIS Topic is what brought me here and what I posted in near exclusively for Many Years after my joing USMB in 2006.

The Israelis Always wanted land for Peace until after 2005 when a majority swung against it after seeing what happened post 2005/Gaza-Giveback/Hamas election and attacks.

Israel was in favor of sharing the land and was FOR the 1947 (UN Res 181) partition plan. They declared statehood on that basis, but the Arabs did not agree and attacked hoping to wipe out Israel and the Jews in it. They lost and some land with it.

Between 1948 and 1967 when the Arabs controlled current 'p-p-p-palaestine' there was no move to make a state. Arabs didn't buy that shlt!
Jordan ANNEXED the West Bank and gave them all citizenship/passports.
Egypt ruled Gaza.
It was only after Losing the 1967 war that Hussein 'gave' it to the 'palestinians'/Arabs left over from the greater British Mandate in which millions became 'Jordanians'/the First 'Palestine.'

Further...
Israel offered back all the conquered 1967 land after that defensive if Preemptive war in exchange for mere recognition by the Arab states.
They refused with the famous "Three Nos" of the Khartoum Conference of August 1967. (google it)
Only thus "Occupation," if slowly.

“I think that this is the first war in history that on the morrow the victors sued for peace and the vanquished called for unconditional surrender.”
- Abba Eban

More, but a bit at a time.
`

Is Genesis 15:18-21 a fairytale?

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

The only thing that the Israelis and the Palestinians seem to agree on is that their opposites should not exist as sovereign countries. Is this an immutable law of religious beliefs, or is it a stubborn bargaining position that both sides have taken? Will it ultimately take the removal of millions of Israelis or Palestinians from the area to resolve this conflict?

The idea of resettling local populations to other areas has been around (and practiced) for thousands of years. [Even Hitler wanted to resettle European Jews to the French colony of Madagascar before that became unrealistic.] Are there any geographical options today that might separate these two warring parties before they annihilate each other?

Not any longer, it was possible a hundred years ago, but Britain supported a foreign colonization of Palestine rather than supporting the people's right to self determination. Colonial states rarely coexist peacefully with the people they colonize.

 

[gipper]

I don't think you understand the goal here. Its not a reset to October 6. Israel is dismantling Hamas. Entirely. Israel is disabling Hamas to such an extent that there is no chance of an October 7 attack again. Israel is not looking for "opportunities", it is demanding surrender.

Nope. I don't buy that argument. Hamas can absolutely be rendered inoperable by military means. It can be kept inoperable by military means. The thinly disguised attempt at victim-blaming and making Israel responsible for the vile ideology held by the people of Gaza can also be reversed. It will take two generations, maybe more. But it can be done.

You mean Israel is mass murdering defenseless Palestinians to eliminate them, and you gladly support this new holocaust.

Psycho!!

 

[Shusha]

You mean Israel is mass murdering defenseless Palestinians to eliminate them, and you gladly support this new holocaust.

Psycho!!

Sigh. You can put words in my mouth, but it accomplishes nothing to do so.

 

[gipper]

Sigh. You can put words in my mouth, but it accomplishes nothing to do so.

Except that it exposes you as Zionist fool.

 

[Shusha]

Except that it exposes you as Zionist fool.

Awww. How sweet. I've been downgraded from psycho to merely a fool. All in the space of what? an hour?

 

[gipper]

Awww. How sweet. I've been downgraded from psycho to merely a fool. All in the space of what? an hour?

Oh no! I suspect you’re both.

 

[Coyote]

Again, I think we have a misunderstanding of goals. (Wait, no first we have a misunderstanding of responsibility. The taking of civilian hostages is the commission of an atrocity. The responsibility lies with Hamas and the people of Gaza who contributed.)

I don’t think there is any misunderstanding of responsibility. Why do you think there is?

There is no more shallow understanding. Israel is no longer framing the goal as "what do we have to do to get these hostages back". (Otherwise known as "what rewards do we give those who commit atrocities against us"). Again, there is no going back to October 6. The primary goal, then, is to eliminate the expectation that taking hostages is a useful strategy.

So Israel’s goal is the destruction of Gaza (and the political preservation of the PM) over the lives of the hostages. We already know the lives of the Palestinians are of little value.

I think I am correct however in saying: the lives of the hostages are being sacrificed for a “greater goal” .