The Palestine Solution

[Hollie]

The blockade is the BEST military tactic to employ in order to minimize the consequences to innocent Israeli citizens while not escalating the conflict or re-occupying Gaza and applying sovereignty.

The Israeli military has been pounding Palestinian civilians for over 70 years and has not won yet.

And they call the Palestinians incompetent.

And yet, the Pal'istanian terrorists are so quick to whine and moan about "disproportionate force" when Israel responds to acts of war.

My view is that Israel has been far to lenient in its response to decades of provocation from islamic terrorists. Decades of attacks from Pal'istanian terrorists have continued because the cost to them has not been so great as to make it unthinkable to continue.

 

[Coyote]

I like to think that but I'm not so sure. There is no Nelson Mandella figure to negotiate peace and reconciliation. Without reconciliation can you have true peace and true justice? I'm thinking about countries like the former Rhodesia where "justice" turned into vengeance.

There can not be justice until the fundamental underlying ideologies change and the Arab Muslims, along with those Westerners who support them, stop demonizing Israel and begin to recognize her rights. Her rights to territory; her rights to be a State for the Jewish people; her rights to her own history; her rights to pray and worship and protect her holy places; the right of her people to determine their own values and laws and culture; the right to defend their citizens, their borders and their territory.

I think that's a one-sided look at the causes of hostility here. There is a great deal of demonizing of the Palestinians going on as well that goes unacknowledged.

One example is the claim that the Palestinians routinely teach their children to hate in their schools. This is a meme repeated so often many just accept it as true and never question it. Yet a study by the US State Department found that wasn't entirely true and such and that a similar demonization occurred in Israeli textbooks. In both cases - such negative accounts were rare enough to be statistically insignificant. What was more significant was how they portrayed events, emphasizing some, minimizing others and a lack of information humanizing the other side. This was evident in the text books of both the Palestinians and the Israeli's.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/pomegranate/2013/02/israeli-and-palestinian-textbooks
The report says that Israeli and Palestinian teachers both portray their neighbours as enemies, though Israel does so considerably less. After ploughing through nearly 30,000 pages of text, the researchers found that 49% of texts dealing with Palestinians in Israeli state-issued schoolbooks are negative; in government-funded Orthodox Jewish academies the figure rises to 73%. One such textbook depicts Arabs as “bloodthirsty” and “a nest of murderers”.

In Palestinian textbooks 84% of the references to Israelis are negative. In both Palestinians and Israeli state schools the books promote “martyrdom-sacrifice through death”. Each side glorifies itself, while denigrating the other.​

Moreover, the textbooks tend to deny each other’s existence. Of 800 maps of their contested land studied by the researchers, 87% of the Israeli ones mark none of the land between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan river as Palestinian, whereas 96% of Palestinian maps make no mention of Israel. “Israeli school maps feed into the Palestinian narrative that Israel wants to grab more and more land, and Palestinian school maps feed an Israeli narrative that Palestinians want to throw them into the sea,” says Bruce Wexler, the Yale professor who oversaw the project. Israeli critics of the report have panned the Council of Religious Institutions of the Holy Land, an association of local rabbis, imams and priests, who commissioned Mr Wexler, a Jewish American.​

I will agree though, that Israel seems to be ahead of Palestine in recognizing the terrible effects of this type of education, or at least calling it too question. A 2012 lynching of an Arab youth promoted some political soul searching among some politicians: The Jewish Week | Connecting the World to Jewish News, Culture, and Opinion

“We have had a couple of generations since the 1967 war and the reality of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,” said Ami Nahshon, president of the New York-based Abraham Fund Initiatives, which works to promote peaceful coexistence between Israeli Jewish and Arab citizens.


“It should be no huge surprise that generations of Israeli youngsters have grown up with attitudes reinforced by public figures and their own communities and families.”


He cited a public opinion poll by the Israel Democracy Institute that found that about one-third of Israeli Jews do not consider Arab citizens “Israeli,” that nearly 40 percent of Jews would not work under an Arab, two-thirds avoid entering an Arab home, and one-third would deny Arab Israelis their voting rights.​

While this culture of hate is not representative of all Israeli's, neither is it representative of all Palestinians - events are overtaking us. More and more Palestinian knife attacks on Israeli civilians, more and more extremist Israeli attacks on Palestinians. Attitudes need to change - but that is going to require a determined effort by the political leadership of both sides and a willingness to acknowledge each other's rights to exist as a people.

Given that THIS is what is being taught to the children of both sides - why is it no surprise that neither side recognizes the right of the other to exist? Israel has a right to exist as a sovereign nation, it's make up and culture and laws to be determined by it's own people. Israel has a right to it's own history. But so do the Palestinians. Overall, much of the world recognizes Israel's right to exist. Far fewer (but growing) recognizes the recipricol right for the Palestinians.

The problem is that there are no Arab Muslims who are willing to really acknowledge and fundamentally believe in the rights of the Jewish people. And there are a shockingly large number of Westerners who also fail to believe in the rights of the Jewish people (witness this forum).

I disagree. This forum - IP in particular, attracts extremists and some of the worst anti-semites and islamophobes. For every anti-Israeli person there is an equally "passionate" anti-Palestinian person. Look at the number of people calling for Palestinians to be deported to other Arab countries, referring to them as animals, stating they have no right to any state. The majority of people here recognize Israel's right to exist, fewer grant that to the Palestinians. When it comes to having other nations recognize Israel as a "Jewish State" it gets more complicated because it is, in fact, a state with a plurality of religions and more than one definition of "citizenship". This is not just a westerner's viewpoint, it's a viewpoint expressed by many Israelis themselves. I think most of the anger comes not from Israel's existence, but from the lack of a just solution for the Palestinians.

Let's look at Gaza. Israel has no interest in Gaza. It is not home to important holy places, it is not a vital area of security. Israel can give up Gaza with virtually no consequences. Gaza also has a ton of potential as a self-supporting, viable nation (think of the tourism opportunities -- have you seen the beaches?) So it seems to me to be a no-brainer to encourage Gaza to independance.

So Israel pulls entirely out of Gaza -- uprooting 10,000 people and ethnically cleansing Gaza for the Palestinian peoples. The borders are not in dispute. What would have happened if there had been a leader to arise out of Gaza who decided to develop Gaza into a viable nation State, living peacefully alongside with Egypt and Israel, developing trade and the economy, caretaking the water supply, providing social services, developing agriculture and tourism. No rockets, no mortars, no suicide bombers, no tunnels, no kidnapping of soldiers? What would have happened?

It seems to me that we would have a thriving State of Gaza.

So why didn't it happen? Because a thriving State of Gaza is not what the Palestinians want.

What would have happened if Israel chose to recognize the legitimacy of Gaza's elected government and tried to work with them? I'm not saying Hamas is good etc etc - but as a political power they were never given the chance to prove themselves.

And this talk about, "defending themselves" is a load of BS. Defending themselves from whom? What is it, exactly, that the Gazans want Israel to do? Yes, yes -- remove the blockade and normalize the border. I get that. But what makes people think that removing the blockade and normalizing an international border when you are importing weapons and constantly committing attacks on innocent Israeli civilians is going to happen? Are you kidding? The blockade ends when the belligerence ends. If they stopped attacking Israel and just worked on their own shit -- there would not be any more conflict. It would be over.

Israel has systematically destroyed Gaza's economy (and yes, Hamas has done little to improve it) but it's kind of what came first the chicken or the egg. Israel left Gaza (and I wouldn't call it "ethnic cleansing" since the settlements weren't legal), but it still retained control over Gaza’s borders, power grid, trade (import/exports), airspace and coastline - pretty significant if you want to develop an economy.

Do Gazans have a right to defend themselves? Of course they do. But NO ONE is attacking them. A blockade is a DEFENSE not an attack.

A blockade is a defense to one, and an attack to the other.

So, yes, we need someone in Gaza to lead them to peace. There is no such person there at this point. And unfortunately, far too many people support Hamas; their anti-Israel and antisemitic ideology and their charter which demands that every inch of the territory be returned to Muslim rule.

Unfortunately, I agree - but it's not just attitudes in Gaza that need to change. There are far too many Israeli's who believe that Israel has a right to all of those lands and that fear is justified to them in Israeli textbooks and in expanding settlements.

 

[Shusha]

Coyote, I appreciate your continued interest in this thread and your continued focus on looking forward and at solutions. There's alot to address in your post. I'll do my best, but let me know if I miss something important and I will come back to it.

I think that's a one-sided look at the causes of hostility here. There is a great deal of demonizing of the Palestinians going on as well that goes unacknowledged.

While this culture of hate is not representative of all Israeli's, neither is it representative of all Palestinians - events are overtaking us. More and more Palestinian knife attacks on Israeli civilians, more and more extremist Israeli attacks on Palestinians. Attitudes need to change - but that is going to require a determined effort by the political leadership of both sides and a willingness to acknowledge each other's rights to exist as a people.

Given that THIS is what is being taught to the children of both sides - why is it no surprise that neither side recognizes the right of the other to exist? Israel has a right to exist as a sovereign nation, it's make up and culture and laws to be determined by it's own people. Israel has a right to it's own history. But so do the Palestinians. Overall, much of the world recognizes Israel's right to exist. Far fewer (but growing) recognizes the recipricol right for the Palestinians.

This is by far the hardest to address.

Yes, there is some demonizing of Palestinians. You will get no argument from me on that point. However, I find it disproportionate in both word and deed on the Palestinian side. Israelis are not committing hundreds of knife attacks on Arabs. Though there has been one that I know of. Jewish people are not harassing Muslims on the Temple Mount when they visit or pray there. Jewish people are not naming streets for suicide bombers or hanging the names of suicide bombers on Xmas trees outside of universities. Jewish people are not creating commemorative art displays celebrating dead Arabs in pizza parlours. Preschool Jewish children do not have holiday plays for their parents which depict killing the Arabs and wearing bombs on themselves. Etc, etc.

I ENTIRELY and very strongly disagree that much of the world denies Palestinian right to exist as a sovereign nation. I also strongly disagree that most Israelis (and Jews) deny the right of the Palestinians to sovereignty. I think that is an accepted concept in Israel.

This forum - IP in particular, attracts extremists and some of the worst anti-semites and islamophobes. For every anti-Israeli person there is an equally "passionate" anti-Palestinian person. Look at the number of people calling for Palestinians to be deported to other Arab countries, referring to them as animals, stating they have no right to any state.

I have admittedly only been here for a few weeks. And only on I/P, not on the other forums. I have seen one person call for the deportation of Palestinans (an idea I promptly and strongly disagreed with). I have seen no one call Palestinians animals. And I have seen no one state Palestinians have no right to a state (although there has been one person questioning as to whether or not they have a right to another two states). Now, I don't read every thread. This board is too busy for that (a plus for me).

On the other side, anti-semitism is rampant here. There is a whole party going on on another thread with multiple people claiming all sorts of traditional anti-semitic stereotypes.

The majority of people here recognize Israel's right to exist, fewer grant that to the Palestinians.

I disagree. Only one poster on the pro-Israel+pro-Palestinian side routinely denies two more states for the Palestinians. He thinks the Palestinians should be happy with just one. The rest of us, as far as I can see, agree that there should be one or two more Palestinian states.

Israel has systematically destroyed Gaza's economy (and yes, Hamas has done little to improve it) but it's kind of what came first the chicken or the egg. Israel left Gaza (and I wouldn't call it "ethnic cleansing" since the settlements weren't legal), but it still retained control over Gaza’s borders, power grid, trade (import/exports), airspace and coastline - pretty significant if you want to develop an economy.

Of course it was ethnic cleansing. Removing people from land which they purchased and live because they are the "wrong" ethnic group is the very definition of ethnic cleansing. It is not illegal for a person of the "wrong" ethnic group to live under the sovereignty of another ethnic group. It does not confer or remove sovereignty for a person or a bunch of the "wrong" ethnic group to live in a territory. Arab Palestinian Muslims living in Israel does not change the sovereignty of Israel. Those Arab Palestinian Muslims do not have to be removed from Israel in order for Israel to have sovereignty over that territory. The very idea of removing Arab Muslim Palestinians from Israel is heinous. You even implied that it was heinous when discussing the one member who suggests deporting Palestinians to Jordan. And yet, when discussing Jews -- no one seems to realize that it is the exact same thing. It is heinous to uproot people and force them to move because they are the "wrong" ethnicity. And this applies to everyone! Not just to Palestinians. !

Israel has always been very willing to ease restrictions when belligerent attacks are minimized. With no attacks, restrictions would be minimal and would quickly be removed. But we both know that can not yet happen. Because Gazans do not yet want a peaceful, co-existence with Israel.

A blockade is a defense to one, and an attack to the other.

Not so and here's the test. If the government of Gaza stops its belligerent, indiscriminate, illegal attacks on Israel -- what will happen? No more conflict. No more war. No more deaths. If Israel lifts the blockade -- what will happen? More weapons are imported into Gaza and the conflict escalates.

Unfortunately, I agree - but it's not just attitudes in Gaza that need to change. There are far too many Israeli's who believe that Israel has a right to all of those lands ...

Israel has absolutely no interest in holding onto Gaza.

 

[Coyote]

Coyote, I appreciate your continued interest in this thread and your continued focus on looking forward and at solutions. There's alot to address in your post. I'll do my best, but let me know if I miss something important and I will come back to it.

I think that's a one-sided look at the causes of hostility here. There is a great deal of demonizing of the Palestinians going on as well that goes unacknowledged.

While this culture of hate is not representative of all Israeli's, neither is it representative of all Palestinians - events are overtaking us. More and more Palestinian knife attacks on Israeli civilians, more and more extremist Israeli attacks on Palestinians. Attitudes need to change - but that is going to require a determined effort by the political leadership of both sides and a willingness to acknowledge each other's rights to exist as a people.

Given that THIS is what is being taught to the children of both sides - why is it no surprise that neither side recognizes the right of the other to exist? Israel has a right to exist as a sovereign nation, it's make up and culture and laws to be determined by it's own people. Israel has a right to it's own history. But so do the Palestinians. Overall, much of the world recognizes Israel's right to exist. Far fewer (but growing) recognizes the recipricol right for the Palestinians.

This is by far the hardest to address.

Yes, there is some demonizing of Palestinians. You will get no argument from me on that point. However, I find it disproportionate in both word and deed on the Palestinian side. Israelis are not committing hundreds of knife attacks on Arabs. Though there has been one that I know of. Jewish people are not harassing Muslims on the Temple Mount when they visit or pray there. Jewish people are not naming streets for suicide bombers or hanging the names of suicide bombers on Xmas trees outside of universities. Jewish people are not creating commemorative art displays celebrating dead Arabs in pizza parlours. Preschool Jewish children do not have holiday plays for their parents which depict killing the Arabs and wearing bombs on themselves. Etc, etc.

Israeli's are not committing hundreds of knife attacks on Palestinians because they don't have to - they have all the conventional power on their side. They have the military, and the Palestinians are under military law, they can attack back when and if they feel a need to defend themselves and the casualties are always much higher amongst Palestinian civilians than Israeli civilians. That's not justifying it - but it's the way things happen in an assymetrical conflict.

Personally - holy places should be open to all worshipers who behave themselves - that's what I feel. Muslim's need to learn to share it with Jewish worshipers.

When it comes to Jewish people "not naming streets for suicide bombers or hanging the names of suicide bombers on Xmas trees outside of universities" - they don't need to any more. They already did and that time is now passed and is now part of history and they've won their state. They still commemerate the bombing of the King David Hotel.

Other terrorists commemerated include Menachem Begin ( though like Nelson Mandella, he was able to transcend terrorism and build a nation) - Irgun commander between 1943-48, a time which saw a dramatic increase in civilian attacks. David Raziel, Irgun commander of Jeruselum, who's term included a sequence of bloody market-place bombings, is commemerated by a moshav and by streets bearing his name.

I ENTIRELY and very strongly disagree that much of the world denies Palestinian right to exist as a sovereign nation. I also strongly disagree that most Israelis (and Jews) deny the right of the Palestinians to sovereignty. I think that is an accepted concept in Israel.

You have Netanyahu stating clearly there will be no Palestinian state. According to this article, a poll shows Israeli support for a 2-state solution at only 51% and Palestinian support is also at 51%. Perhaps more telling is what each side believes the other's goals are:

"Fifty-six percent of Palestinians think that Israel’s goals are to extend its borders to cover all the area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea and expel its Arab citizens, and 25 percent think Israel’s goals are to annex the West Bank while denying political rights to the Palestinians."
"Forty-three percent of Israelis think that Palestinians' aspirations in the long run are to conquer the State of Israel and destroy much of the Jewish population.​

But there are some glimmers of light - this poll is kind of interesting: New Poll Shows Most Palestinians for Practical Progress, Tactical Compromises with Israel

As Mideast experts and advocates conclude their debate about the Iran nuclear deal, their attention may well revert to the Israeli-Palestinian arena. A new poll demonstrates that Palestinians now have surprisingly nuanced views on many current and controversial issues.


By way of example, majorities in both the West Bank and Gaza still want to "liberate all of historic Palestine" someday, and meanwhile voice support for "armed struggle and car attacks against the occupation." Yet majorities also desire economic cooperation and a Hamas ceasefire with Israel -- and around half even accept the principle of "a state for the Jewish people," one to which Palestinian refugees would have no "right of return." One reason for these surprises is simply that this poll asked some questions that other pollsters typically do not.​

This forum - IP in particular, attracts extremists and some of the worst anti-semites and islamophobes. For every anti-Israeli person there is an equally "passionate" anti-Palestinian person. Look at the number of people calling for Palestinians to be deported to other Arab countries, referring to them as animals, stating they have no right to any state.

I have admittedly only been here for a few weeks. And only on I/P, not on the other forums. I have seen one person call for the deportation of Palestinans (an idea I promptly and strongly disagreed with). I have seen no one call Palestinians animals. And I have seen no one state Palestinians have no right to a state (although there has been one person questioning as to whether or not they have a right to another two states). Now, I don't read every thread. This board is too busy for that (a plus for me).

On the other side, anti-semitism is rampant here. There is a whole party going on on another thread with multiple people claiming all sorts of traditional anti-semitic stereotypes.

I agree, there is a lot of anti-semitism but there is also a lot of racism and anti-islamism as well and a lot of pretty hateful postings particularly when you go outside of IP. There have been multiple people callling for deportation of Palestinians, and stating they have no right to a state, they are squatters etc (like the other side talking about invaders) it's all there if you look for it.

The majority of people here recognize Israel's right to exist, fewer grant that to the Palestinians.

I disagree. Only one poster on the pro-Israel+pro-Palestinian side routinely denies two more states for the Palestinians. He thinks the Palestinians should be happy with just one. The rest of us, as far as I can see, agree that there should be one or two more Palestinian states.

What do you mean "two more" states? They don't even have one. One state would be ideal but there is no way to make Gaza and West Bank one that I can think of. Multiple posters have expressed the opinion that the Palestinians should be deported to other Arab states and that Israel "should not give up one inch".

Israel has systematically destroyed Gaza's economy (and yes, Hamas has done little to improve it) but it's kind of what came first the chicken or the egg. Israel left Gaza (and I wouldn't call it "ethnic cleansing" since the settlements weren't legal), but it still retained control over Gaza’s borders, power grid, trade (import/exports), airspace and coastline - pretty significant if you want to develop an economy.

Of course it was ethnic cleansing. Removing people from land which they purchased and live because they are the "wrong" ethnic group is the very definition of ethnic cleansing. It is not illegal for a person of the "wrong" ethnic group to live under the sovereignty of another ethnic group. It does not confer or remove sovereignty for a person or a bunch of the "wrong" ethnic group to live in a territory. Arab Palestinian Muslims living in Israel does not change the sovereignty of Israel. Those Arab Palestinian Muslims do not have to be removed from Israel in order for Israel to have sovereignty over that territory. The very idea of removing Arab Muslim Palestinians from Israel is heinous. You even implied that it was heinous when discussing the one member who suggests deporting Palestinians to Jordan. And yet, when discussing Jews -- no one seems to realize that it is the exact same thing. It is heinous to uproot people and force them to move because they are the "wrong" ethnicity. And this applies to everyone! Not just to Palestinians. !

How can it be "ethnic cleansing" when the settlements in Gaza were there illegally? I agree, it's heinous to force people to move but I also question the authorities in allowing people to build in occupied territories and allowing the situation to occur. I would consider the expulsion of the Jews from Arab countries following the establishment of Israel as ethnic cleansing, but not the settlements in Gaza.

Israel has always been very willing to ease restrictions when belligerent attacks are minimized. With no attacks, restrictions would be minimal and would quickly be removed. But we both know that can not yet happen. Because Gazans do not yet want a peaceful, co-existence with Israel.

A blockade is a defense to one, and an attack to the other.

Not so and here's the test. If the government of Gaza stops its belligerent, indiscriminate, illegal attacks on Israel -- what will happen? No more conflict. No more war. No more deaths. If Israel lifts the blockade -- what will happen? More weapons are imported into Gaza and the conflict escalates.

My impression was that the blockade went up in retaliation for the election of Hamas.

Unfortunately, I agree - but it's not just attitudes in Gaza that need to change. There are far too many Israeli's who believe that Israel has a right to all of those lands ...

Israel has absolutely no interest in holding onto Gaza.

No, but there is the West Bank.
How can it be "ethnic cleansing" when the settlements in Gaza were there illegally?

 

[Slyhunter]

Until Israel removes the blockade, Israel is making war. When and if Israel removes the blockade, there could be negotiations, until then the Palestinians have every right to try to break the blockade. The fact of the matter is that Israel has no intention of relinquishing control of Gaza whether the Palestinians resist or not.

You don't know that until you try the recommended step of following the truce long enough for the rest of the world to know you are serious this time. Until then there is no reason to remove the blockade.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Do you refer to Texas and California as occupied territory? Shit happens when you lose wars you start.

Conquer by Conquest wasn't illegal until the end of WWII.

You can inform the Czech and Slovak citizens as well as Vietnamese, Cambodian, Koreans, Burmese, Sudanese, Ugandans, Tibetians, Congoans, Polish, Argentine, Ethiopians........

But you lefties don't care about what goes on around the world. Just that 5 mile wide strip of sand where the Jews live.

 

[Billo_Really]

You can inform the Czech and Slovak citizens as well as Vietnamese, Cambodian, Koreans, Burmese, Sudanese, Ugandans, Tibetians, Congoans, Polish, Argentine, Ethiopians........

But you lefties don't care about what goes on around the world. Just that 5 mile wide strip of sand where the Jews live.

Actually, I don't care about that either.

The only strip of sand I care about, is Sunset Beach, Ca.

 

[Weatherman2020]

You can inform the Czech and Slovak citizens as well as Vietnamese, Cambodian, Koreans, Burmese, Sudanese, Ugandans, Tibetians, Congoans, Polish, Argentine, Ethiopians........

But you lefties don't care about what goes on around the world. Just that 5 mile wide strip of sand where the Jews live.

Actually, I don't care about that either.

The only strip of sand I care about, is Sunset Beach, Ca.

No, you post jibberish about it being illegal to take land by war. That's bullshit. Sh*t happens when you lose wars you start, and losing land is one of them.

The entire world that is full of bullshit evil focuses upon one tiny strip of sand for one reason and one reason only - the Jews really are Gods chosen people.

 

[montelatici]

You can inform the Czech and Slovak citizens as well as Vietnamese, Cambodian, Koreans, Burmese, Sudanese, Ugandans, Tibetians, Congoans, Polish, Argentine, Ethiopians........

But you lefties don't care about what goes on around the world. Just that 5 mile wide strip of sand where the Jews live.

Actually, I don't care about that either.

The only strip of sand I care about, is Sunset Beach, Ca.

No, you post jibberish about it being illegal to take land by war. That's bullshit. Sh*t happens when you lose wars you start, and losing land is one of them.

The entire world that is full of bullshit evil focuses upon one tiny strip of sand for one reason and one reason only - the Jews really are Gods chosen people.

Well, there you go. When a people hold themselves to be better than others, like Germans and others before them did, the problems begin.

 

[Indeependent]

You can inform the Czech and Slovak citizens as well as Vietnamese, Cambodian, Koreans, Burmese, Sudanese, Ugandans, Tibetians, Congoans, Polish, Argentine, Ethiopians........

But you lefties don't care about what goes on around the world. Just that 5 mile wide strip of sand where the Jews live.

Actually, I don't care about that either.

The only strip of sand I care about, is Sunset Beach, Ca.

No, you post jibberish about it being illegal to take land by war. That's bullshit. Sh*t happens when you lose wars you start, and losing land is one of them.

The entire world that is full of bullshit evil focuses upon one tiny strip of sand for one reason and one reason only - the Jews really are Gods chosen people.

Well, there you go. When a people hold themselves to be beter than others, like Germans and others before yhem, thr problems beging.

And when a people damn others to Eternal Hell Fire?

 

[Weatherman2020]

You can inform the Czech and Slovak citizens as well as Vietnamese, Cambodian, Koreans, Burmese, Sudanese, Ugandans, Tibetians, Congoans, Polish, Argentine, Ethiopians........

But you lefties don't care about what goes on around the world. Just that 5 mile wide strip of sand where the Jews live.

Actually, I don't care about that either.

The only strip of sand I care about, is Sunset Beach, Ca.

No, you post jibberish about it being illegal to take land by war. That's bullshit. Sh*t happens when you lose wars you start, and losing land is one of them.

The entire world that is full of bullshit evil focuses upon one tiny strip of sand for one reason and one reason only - the Jews really are Gods chosen people.

Well, there you go. When a people hold themselves to be better than others, like Germans and others before them did, the problems begin.

More jibberish. Israel has been the one attacked. And kicked Islamofascist ass for it.

 

[Shusha]

Israeli's are not committing hundreds of knife attacks on Palestinians because they don't have to - they have all the conventional power on their side. ...

Really? That's the reason? So you believe that Israelis would resort to terrorism -- individually stabbing people and driving cars into bus stops and sending suicide bombers on missions to pizza parlours? If only they were on the weaker side? You believe that it is a normal, inevitable function of humanity to resort to terrorism? Canadians would do it too? You feel that the reason why 85% of Palestinians feel that terrorism and suicide attacks are justified is because they are victims? Or that 89% of them believe it is justified to kill someone to defend Islam? You don't think it has anything to do with a foundational ideology? Or you think Israelis have the same ideology?

When it comes to Jewish people "not naming streets for suicide bombers or hanging the names of suicide bombers on Xmas trees outside of universities" - they don't need to any more. They already did and that time is now passed and is now part of history and they've won their state. They still commemerate the bombing of the King David Hotel.

I think you attempting to draw an equivalency between the celebration of "martyrs" in Palestinian culture reveals that there is no comparison. First, everyone brings up the King David Hotel bombing. Everyone. It isn't even close to the best one to bring up if you want to talk about Jewish terrorism. Terrorism committed by Jews or Israelis exists. No doubt about it. But it is rare. So rare that everyone brings up the King David Hotel bombing as their go-to move. An event which happened in the midst of a war more than 60 years ago. And which was without doubt a viable military target. Without doubt. And one which was vital to the success of the Israeli war effort. And one in which plans to mitigate or prevent civilian deaths were put in place. AND the commemorative plaque on the hotel recalls the tragedy of those deaths -- it does not celebrate those deaths.

This is in stark contrast to the jubilant celebration of the deaths of Israelis (read also: Jews) that we find in Palestinian culture.
The Palestinian ideology is that the murder of Israelis (read also: Jews) is entirely justified as none are innocent and all are viable military targets. Those who murder Israelis (Jews) are to be celebrated as heroes, not for having achieved a military victory or a victory of self-determination -- but for killing Jews.

What do you mean "two more" states? They don't even have one. One state would be ideal but there is no way to make Gaza and West Bank one that I can think of. Multiple posters have expressed the opinion that the Palestinians should be deported to other Arab states and that Israel "should not give up one inch".

Jordan was the first State created for the self-determination of the Arab Muslim people out of the Palestinian Mandate. The remainder was intended for the State of the Jewish people. Now, the Arab Muslims would like another State in Judea and Samaria. And yet a third in Gaza. (We agree that reconciliation between Gaza and the PA is unlikely). Do you think after that they will want a fourth state in Nazareth? And a fifth in Haifa? Maybe a sixth in the Negev? As Israel becomes smaller and smaller and smaller? At what point do we say that,no, THIS land is for the Jewish people?

How can it be "ethnic cleansing" when the settlements in Gaza were there illegally?

I dispute the idea that the "settlements" are illegal. The entire concept of the illegality of the settlements rests on the idea that Palestine must be Judenrein -- that no Jews be permitted to live on Palestinian soil -- nor any soil which MAY eventually become Palestinian. That concept is vile and violates all concepts of human rights against racism and ethnicity.

Land ownership does not confer sovereignty. And to demand that a territory not contain people of a certain ethnic group is heinous. There is nothing about having Jews living in Gaza or Judea/Samaria which prevents Palestinian sovereignty.

Gaza and Judea and Samaria were ethnically cleansed of all Jewish people in 1948 when Jordan and Egypt occupied the area. Why is no one screaming for the return of all of those Jewish people and their descendants to their former homes? Why is it that when a Jew buys a house or builds a house it is considered illegal but when an Arab Muslim buys or builds a house it is not? Double standards of the most vile variety.

Now, having said that, practically, knowing how ideologically opposed the Arab Muslim Palestinians are to sharing (ahem, cough, cough) "their" land and "their" holy site with the dreadful Jews, it is, perhaps, provocative of Israel to permit Jews to buy houses and walk on Temple Mount. (And I do hope you sincerely hear how utterly ridiculous that sounds). Practically speaking, the Jewish people will have to make Gaza and a new State of Palestine Judenrein. Without the protection of Israel, they simply will not be safe.

Likewise, while you and and I agree that ALL people should (duh!) have access to holy sites -- the Jewish people will have to curtail our rights in order to prevent a holy war by billions of Muslims. Its not fair. Its not right. But what are you to do with billions of Muslims who won't share?

My impression was that the blockade went up in retaliation for the election of Hamas.

I believe you are mistaken. Following Hamas' election, they were asked if they would renouce violence against Israel and honor the treaties and agreements already in place. They refused. Economic sanctions were put in place (not a blockade). They responded with belligerent, indiscriminate, illegal attacks. Blockade was instituted.


However, and again, none of this moves us forward. I will ask you, since no one else has dared to answer it: Why are the Gazan people NOT moving toward self-determination and peace alongside Israel? There is no border dispute. There is nothing much even to be negotiated. Why do they not simply cease their attacks? What is their goal?

 

[montelatici]

"Jordan was the first State created for the self-determination of the Arab Muslim people out of the Palestinian Mandate. The remainder was intended for the State of the Jewish people."

Jordan was never intended for the Palestinian people. It was intended to assuage the Hashemites and their Bedouin tribe for having supported the British in WW1 (Lawrence of Arabia). Palestine was never intended as a state for the Jewish people. As explained by the British (Churchill):

"These apprehensions, so far as the Arabs are concerned, are partly based upon exaggerated interpretations of the meaning of the Declaration favouring the establishment of a Jewish National Home in Palestine, made on behalf of His Majesty's Government on 2nd November, 1917. Unauthorised statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab Delegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language or culture in Palestine..............should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded in Palestine In this connection it has been observed with satisfaction that at the meeting of the Zionist Congress, the supreme governing body of the Zionist Organisation, held at Carlsbad in September, 1921, a resolution was passed expressing as the official statement of Zionist aims "the determination of the Jewish people to live with the Arab people on terms of unity and mutual respect, and together with them to make the common home into a flourishing community, the upbuilding of which may assure to each of the peoples an undisturbed national development."...................Further, it is contemplated that the status of all citizens of Palestine in the eyes of the law shall be Palestinian, and it has never been intended that they, or any section of them, should possess any other juridical status."

http://israelipalestinian.procon.org/sourcefiles/ispaldoc1922a.pdf

 

[Coyote]

I'm going to answer this in seperate posts - seperating the quotes gets complicated

Israeli's are not committing hundreds of knife attacks on Palestinians because they don't have to - they have all the conventional power on their side. ...

Really? That's the reason? So you believe that Israelis would resort to terrorism -- individually stabbing people and driving cars into bus stops and sending suicide bombers on missions to pizza parlours? If only they were on the weaker side? You believe that it is a normal, inevitable function of humanity to resort to terrorism? Canadians would do it too? You feel that the reason why 85% of Palestinians feel that terrorism and suicide attacks are justified is because they are victims? Or that 89% of them believe it is justified to kill someone to defend Islam? You don't think it has anything to do with a foundational ideology? Or you think Israelis have the same ideology?

Yes I believe Israelis would resort to terrorism because they did when they were trying to win a state. Whether it is inevitable or not...I don't know, I had not thought too much about that but it leads to a question. In the many conflicts that involved seperatist movements, freedom and rights movements, the creation of new states - did any of them not involve some level of terrorism?

 

[Coyote]

When it comes to Jewish people "not naming streets for suicide bombers or hanging the names of suicide bombers on Xmas trees outside of universities" - they don't need to any more. They already did and that time is now passed and is now part of history and they've won their state. They still commemerate the bombing of the King David Hotel.

I think you attempting to draw an equivalency between the celebration of "martyrs" in Palestinian culture reveals that there is no comparison. First, everyone brings up the King David Hotel bombing. Everyone. It isn't even close to the best one to bring up if you want to talk about Jewish terrorism. Terrorism committed by Jews or Israelis exists. No doubt about it. But it is rare. So rare that everyone brings up the King David Hotel bombing as their go-to move. An event which happened in the midst of a war more than 60 years ago. And which was without doubt a viable military target. Without doubt. And one which was vital to the success of the Israeli war effort. And one in which plans to mitigate or prevent civilian deaths were put in place. AND the commemorative plaque on the hotel recalls the tragedy of those deaths -- it does not celebrate those deaths.

I disagree that it is a false equivalency. I bring up the King David, because it was a huge bombing and it's contentious as to whether it was a legitimate military target. But even if you take away that event, you are left with quite a few others: List of Irgun attacks - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia This list includes cafe bombings, multiple market place bombings, cinima bombings, bus bombings - without doubt civilian targets. And there are a lot of them.

This is in stark contrast to the jubilant celebration of the deaths of Israelis (read also: Jews) that we find in Palestinian culture.

The Palestinian ideology is that the murder of Israelis (read also: Jews) is entirely justified as none are innocent and all are viable military targets. Those who murder Israelis (Jews) are to be celebrated as heroes, not for having achieved a military victory or a victory of self-determination -- but for killing Jews.

I agree that that view is far more prevalent among Palestinians than Israeli's and the majority of Israeli society condemns such actoins, but the Israeli's are not totally innocent either.

Look at those (a minority admitedly) who celebrated the Dumas arson murders: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/25/w...eh-arson-death-israel-wedding-video.html?_r=0 and that is not an isolated view among that segment of Israeli society.

 

[Coyote]

What do you mean "two more" states? They don't even have one. One state would be ideal but there is no way to make Gaza and West Bank one that I can think of. Multiple posters have expressed the opinion that the Palestinians should be deported to other Arab states and that Israel "should not give up one inch".

Jordan was the first State created for the self-determination of the Arab Muslim people out of the Palestinian Mandate. The remainder was intended for the State of the Jewish people. Now, the Arab Muslims would like another State in Judea and Samaria. And yet a third in Gaza. (We agree that reconciliation between Gaza and the PA is unlikely). Do you think after that they will want a fourth state in Nazareth? And a fifth in Haifa? Maybe a sixth in the Negev? As Israel becomes smaller and smaller and smaller? At what point do we say that,no, THIS land is for the Jewish people?

That was 1922, almost a century ago and there is a lot of dispute about it - RoccoR and Tinmore know more than I do so I won't make any arguments about it except to say we need to look at it the way things stand now. Jordan is Jordan. The people living in the West Bank did not come from Jordan. Jordan houses a huge number of Palestinian refugees but Jordan is not a Palestine. When people make the argument that the Palestinians already have a state (ie Jordan) it's nothing more than a transparent attempt to disenfranchise them. So the Palestinians currently have no state. I think one state is ideal, but I see the issue of combining Gaza and parts of the West Bank as more of a geographical and security problem than a political one - hence, making them two sounds better unless you have a better option?

At what point do we say - yes, like the Jews, the Palestinians deserve a homeland?

How can it be "ethnic cleansing" when the settlements in Gaza were there illegally?

I dispute the idea that the "settlements" are illegal. The entire concept of the illegality of the settlements rests on the idea that Palestine must be Judenrein -- that no Jews be permitted to live on Palestinian soil -- nor any soil which MAY eventually become Palestinian. That concept is vile and violates all concepts of human rights against racism and ethnicity.

I disagree - they are illegal because they are built on Occupied Territory, and that is under international law.

Also, I question the claim that the Palestinians say Palestine must be Judenrien. When I have heard that claim made - it is usually through a distortion of Abbas' quote where he said he would allow no Israeli presence in Palestine. Are there other supports for that claim? Realistically - I think hatred towards Israeli Jews is so high it would be difficult to guarantee the safety of Jewish citizens in a Palestinian state so you would have a defacto "judenrien" situation.

It is vile, I agree.

But so are the attitudes reflected in these polls of Israeli's towards Arab Israeli citizens:
Poll: Half of Israeli high schoolers oppose equal rights for Arabs
Survey: Most Israeli Jews wouldn't give Palestinians vote if West Bank was annexed

Land ownership does not confer sovereignty. And to demand that a territory not contain people of a certain ethnic group is heinous. There is nothing about having Jews living in Gaza or Judea/Samaria which prevents Palestinian sovereignty.

Agree - but where is that demand being made? How about the many communities in Israel that bar Arab-Israeli's from living there?

Gaza and Judea and Samaria were ethnically cleansed of all Jewish people in 1948 when Jordan and Egypt occupied the area. Why is no one screaming for the return of all of those Jewish people and their descendants to their former homes? Why is it that when a Jew buys a house or builds a house it is considered illegal but when an Arab Muslim buys or builds a house it is not? Double standards of the most vile variety.

There's no double standard. Are those Jewish people calling for a right of return? If so - I have heard nothing of it. If they haven't - then how can you call it a "double standard" when they haven't made a claim? If they make a claim - I would support it to the same extent I do the Palestinian claims.

When an Arab Muslim builds a house - it's usually demolished because he is unable to get a permit for it .... permits are almost always granted for Jewish expansions. Isn't that a double standard?

Now, having said that, practically, knowing how ideologically opposed the Arab Muslim Palestinians are to sharing (ahem, cough, cough) "their" land and "their" holy site with the dreadful Jews, it is, perhaps, provocative of Israel to permit Jews to buy houses and walk on Temple Mount. (And I do hope you sincerely hear how utterly ridiculous that sounds). Practically speaking, the Jewish people will have to make Gaza and a new State of Palestine Judenrein. Without the protection of Israel, they simply will not be safe.

From a very real practical sense - I think so. But looking at Gaza and West Bank seperately, do you think that a future state incorporating portions of Westbank might possibly be able to incorporate Jews? I don't see it in Gaza - but public opinion polls of Gazans have always been more extreme than those of West Bank Palestinians.

Likewise, while you and and I agree that ALL people should (duh!) have access to holy sites -- the Jewish people will have to curtail our rights in order to prevent a holy war by billions of Muslims. Its not fair. Its not right. But what are you to do with billions of Muslims who won't share?

I agree it's not fair and I applaud the Israeli authorities who have to walk a fine line in maintaining both peace and access. It's not right but I don't know the answer. Perhaps once the issue of a Palestinian state is settled - these other fires will become less important. Religion is irrational.

 

[montelatici]

You can inform the Czech and Slovak citizens as well as Vietnamese, Cambodian, Koreans, Burmese, Sudanese, Ugandans, Tibetians, Congoans, Polish, Argentine, Ethiopians........

But you lefties don't care about what goes on around the world. Just that 5 mile wide strip of sand where the Jews live.

Actually, I don't care about that either.

The only strip of sand I care about, is Sunset Beach, Ca.

No, you post jibberish about it being illegal to take land by war. That's bullshit. Sh*t happens when you lose wars you start, and losing land is one of them.

The entire world that is full of bullshit evil focuses upon one tiny strip of sand for one reason and one reason only - the Jews really are Gods chosen people.

Well, there you go. When a people hold themselves to be better than others, like Germans and others before them did, the problems begin.

More jibberish. Israel has been the one attacked. And kicked Islamofascist ass for it.

To put it into simple terms so that even you can understand.

The Zionists were in Europe and the Palestinians lived in Palestine, they were the native people. The Zionists went from Europe to Palestine to evict the native people. How can the native people possibly be the attackers?

 

[Coyote]

However, and again, none of this moves us forward. I will ask you, since no one else has dared to answer it: Why are the Gazan people NOT moving toward self-determination and peace alongside Israel? There is no border dispute. There is nothing much even to be negotiated. Why do they not simply cease their attacks? What is their goal?

For one, I think Hamas has failed them and they have not held elections since Hamas took over.

For another....there may not be a border dispute, but Israel still controlled much of Gaza - they control their airspace, coastline, border crossing etc.

Gaza Fact Check: 10 myths for 10 years of disengagement | Gaza Gateway | Facts and Analysis about the Crossings

1. Israel disengaged from Gaza (and all it got in return were rockets).

In a nutshell: Israel controls Gaza’s territorial waters, air space and most of its border crossings. This isn’t disengagement, just remote control.

When the last Israeli soldier serving in the Gaza Strip exited the territory, on September 11, 2005, a key feature of Israel’s presence in the lives of Gaza residents came to an end. Yet, Israel maintained control of all crossings along its border with Gaza, as well as Gaza’s territorial waters and air space. Israel continues to control the majority of supply of water, electricity and fuel to Gaza. It controls cellular and electronic communication lines and a portion of Gaza’s territory, inside the Strip, in an area the military designates a “no-go zone”. Israeli politicians discuss among themselves whether to allow Gaza residents to build and operate a seaport. Israel allows the entry of construction materials designated for Gaza’s reconstruction, but under condition that it approve every single purchase. It has used Gaza’s fishing zone as a bargaining chip in every ceasefire negotiation at the cessation of hostilities, and refuses to even engage in a conversation about the rebuilding of Gaza’s airport, which lays in ruins after being bombed in 2001 (and 2009).

As for rockets, regrettably, communities in southern Israel have been suffering from rocket fire since 2001, when Israel had a permanent ground presence in Gaza. Israel is facing real security threats. But the way it has chosen to address them is wreaking havoc on the lives of the 1.8 million people living in Gaza – a majority of whom are children – and it is failing to provide security to the residents of southern Israel. In fact, security experts have acknowledged that not only has the closure failed to advance Israel’s security, but rather, it is one of the main drivers of instability in the region.​

 

[P F Tinmore]

However, and again, none of this moves us forward. I will ask you, since no one else has dared to answer it: Why are the Gazan people NOT moving toward self-determination and peace alongside Israel? There is no border dispute. There is nothing much even to be negotiated. Why do they not simply cease their attacks? What is their goal?

For one, I think Hamas has failed them and they have not held elections since Hamas took over.

For another....there may not be a border dispute, but Israel still controlled much of Gaza - they control their airspace, coastline, border crossing etc.

Gaza Fact Check: 10 myths for 10 years of disengagement | Gaza Gateway | Facts and Analysis about the Crossings

1. Israel disengaged from Gaza (and all it got in return were rockets).

In a nutshell: Israel controls Gaza’s territorial waters, air space and most of its border crossings. This isn’t disengagement, just remote control.

When the last Israeli soldier serving in the Gaza Strip exited the territory, on September 11, 2005, a key feature of Israel’s presence in the lives of Gaza residents came to an end. Yet, Israel maintained control of all crossings along its border with Gaza, as well as Gaza’s territorial waters and air space. Israel continues to control the majority of supply of water, electricity and fuel to Gaza. It controls cellular and electronic communication lines and a portion of Gaza’s territory, inside the Strip, in an area the military designates a “no-go zone”. Israeli politicians discuss among themselves whether to allow Gaza residents to build and operate a seaport. Israel allows the entry of construction materials designated for Gaza’s reconstruction, but under condition that it approve every single purchase. It has used Gaza’s fishing zone as a bargaining chip in every ceasefire negotiation at the cessation of hostilities, and refuses to even engage in a conversation about the rebuilding of Gaza’s airport, which lays in ruins after being bombed in 2001 (and 2009).

As for rockets, regrettably, communities in southern Israel have been suffering from rocket fire since 2001, when Israel had a permanent ground presence in Gaza. Israel is facing real security threats. But the way it has chosen to address them is wreaking havoc on the lives of the 1.8 million people living in Gaza – a majority of whom are children – and it is failing to provide security to the residents of southern Israel. In fact, security experts have acknowledged that not only has the closure failed to advance Israel’s security, but rather, it is one of the main drivers of instability in the region.​

When the last Israeli soldier serving in the Gaza Strip exited the territory, on September 11, 2005, a key feature of Israel’s presence in the lives of Gaza residents came to an end. Yet, Israel maintained control of all crossings along its border with Gaza, as well as Gaza’s territorial waters and air space.​

Israel's so called disengagement included a system of closure. The blockade was not in "response to" it was pre planned.

 

[P F Tinmore]

However, and again, none of this moves us forward. I will ask you, since no one else has dared to answer it: Why are the Gazan people NOT moving toward self-determination and peace alongside Israel? There is no border dispute. There is nothing much even to be negotiated. Why do they not simply cease their attacks? What is their goal?

For one, I think Hamas has failed them and they have not held elections since Hamas took over.

For another....there may not be a border dispute, but Israel still controlled much of Gaza - they control their airspace, coastline, border crossing etc.

Gaza Fact Check: 10 myths for 10 years of disengagement | Gaza Gateway | Facts and Analysis about the Crossings

1. Israel disengaged from Gaza (and all it got in return were rockets).

In a nutshell: Israel controls Gaza’s territorial waters, air space and most of its border crossings. This isn’t disengagement, just remote control.

When the last Israeli soldier serving in the Gaza Strip exited the territory, on September 11, 2005, a key feature of Israel’s presence in the lives of Gaza residents came to an end. Yet, Israel maintained control of all crossings along its border with Gaza, as well as Gaza’s territorial waters and air space. Israel continues to control the majority of supply of water, electricity and fuel to Gaza. It controls cellular and electronic communication lines and a portion of Gaza’s territory, inside the Strip, in an area the military designates a “no-go zone”. Israeli politicians discuss among themselves whether to allow Gaza residents to build and operate a seaport. Israel allows the entry of construction materials designated for Gaza’s reconstruction, but under condition that it approve every single purchase. It has used Gaza’s fishing zone as a bargaining chip in every ceasefire negotiation at the cessation of hostilities, and refuses to even engage in a conversation about the rebuilding of Gaza’s airport, which lays in ruins after being bombed in 2001 (and 2009).

As for rockets, regrettably, communities in southern Israel have been suffering from rocket fire since 2001, when Israel had a permanent ground presence in Gaza. Israel is facing real security threats. But the way it has chosen to address them is wreaking havoc on the lives of the 1.8 million people living in Gaza – a majority of whom are children – and it is failing to provide security to the residents of southern Israel. In fact, security experts have acknowledged that not only has the closure failed to advance Israel’s security, but rather, it is one of the main drivers of instability in the region.​

As for rockets, regrettably, communities in southern Israel...​

Sderot, for example, is an illegal Israeli settlement built on occupied Palestinian land.

Should this be discussed in another thread?