Netanyahu claims UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon "encourages terror"

[Saltwater]

Sorry about that.
The impression I got was that it was referring to the people in this thread in general but no matter.

No worries, I'll try to write more clearly.

 

[classical_hero]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_war_crimes_during_World_War_II

If one side claims to hold the moral highground, it is permissable to criticise them when they fall below their own standards, or should we not criticise Israel, is everything it does morally acceptable?

How would to perform the actions of WW2? They were attacking places where military production was happening, so how would you avoid civilian casualties under those circumstance? The actions of the Allies in WW2 are not war crimes. If they are then you cannot prosecute a war without doing so, which makes defending yourself against attacks impossible.
Do you believe Israel can defend themselves?

No it does not.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/12171820/Theres-no-shame-in-Zionism-we-must-reclaim-the-word-from-anti-Semites.html

Zionism is no more than the movement to re-establish and then protect the state of Israel. A Zionist is someone who defends Israel’s right to exist. The Labour Party has a long and proud tradition of supporting Zionism, through luminaries such as Richard Crossman and Ian Mikardo up to the present generation. But attempts to redefine Zionism and corrupt its true meaning were always dangerous and threatening to the progressive cause, simply because – inevitably – such moves would be exploited by genuine anti-Semites.

I'm glad we've got that sorted out, since you aren't a Zionist, then you want the destruction of Israel, plain and simple, or do you agree with the definition, and if not then why not?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I'm glad we've got that sorted out, since you aren't a Zionist, then you want the destruction of Israel, plain and simple, or do you agree with the definition, and if not then why not?

There is quite a gap between "support" and "want the destruction of". I'm no Zionist, since I think the process of taking land to give the European Jews someplace to go rather than accepting them was gross, and that in doing so the major problem that has plagued the world ever since was created, as usual for the convenience of Europeans. But that doesn't mean I am actively plotting, or even seeking, the immediate collapse of their state.

 

[Saltwater]

I think the process of taking land to give the European Jews someplace to go rather than accepting them was gross

No one took or gave the land to Jews, European or otherwise. I'd also encourage you to broaden your horizons to the complexity and dynamics of international politics and the world around you. Not everything revolves around Europe, which itself is far from homogenous. The British were preventing Jews from immigrating with strict quotas and most Jews who did make it did so illegally (ie The Exodus) often being placed in detention camps or deported. The British and the Zionists were literally at war, with the Zionists forming an insurgency due to them wanting to make a state and the British trying to prevent it. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_insurgency_in_Mandatory_Palestine) After Israel was established, the British covertly encouraged the surrounding countries to declare war on it. (http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.615667)

Jews created the modern state of Israel, and even if the UN hadn't recognized it would have made a de-facto state by numbers alone. (IE, the original partition plan had one state with a Jewish Majority and one state with a non-Jewish majority)

 

[Timsup2nothin]

No one took or gave the land to Jews, European or otherwise. I'd also encourage you to broaden your horizons to the complexity and dynamics of international politics and the world around you. Not everything revolves around Europe, which itself is far from homogenous. The British were preventing Jews from immigrating with strict quotas and most Jews who did make it did so illegally (ie The Exodus) often being placed in detention camps or deported. The British and the Zionists were literally at war, with the Zionists forming an insurgency due to them wanting to make a state and the British trying to prevent it. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_insurgency_in_Mandatory_Palestine) After Israel was established, the British covertly encouraged the surrounding countries to declare war on it. (http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.615667)

Jews created the modern state of Israel, and even if the UN hadn't recognized it would have made a de-facto state by numbers alone. (IE, the original partition plan had one state with a Jewish Majority and one state with a non-Jewish majority)

I'm always amused by "You disagree with me, so you must be undereducated."

I don't care what "the British" thought of the process. They were being stripped of their empire, fighting it, and losing...everywhere, including Palestine. In the brave new world of stripping the European powers of their empires the world, ie the UN under US control, said "establish a Jewish state" rather than saying "you lot that wanted Hitler defeated but have plenty of citizens who aren't exactly broken up over his views on Jews need to get that sorted." So, voila, a Jewish theocratic state is born, is allowed to throw open its borders to "refugees" who are hauling in wealth while booting out penniless non Jews as real refugees to become the neighbors' problem, and creates endless conflict in the Middle East for everyone else to have to deal with.

Initially every European nation thought this was a terrific solution. Not one of them put up the slightest resistance to having their Jewish citizens renounce them and show their heels. Not one of them said "wow, the explosive population growth of this new theocratic state is just bound to cause problems." They all said (somewhat appropriately) "The US created this mess, and they have the guns so let them deal with it." And here we are, dealing with it.

 

[Agent327]

Israel is a secular state, not a theocratic one.

Jews created the modern state of Israel, and even if the UN hadn't recognized it would have made a de-facto state by numbers alone.

Zionists created Israel. Apart from that fine distinction, until quite recently the majority of Jews lived outside of Israel: originally Jewish population numbers in Israel were rather small, and this was only changed by massive emigration.

How would to perform the actions of WW2? They were attacking places where military production was happening, so how would you avoid civilian casualties under those circumstance?

Dresden, Hamburg, incendiary bombs on cities? The truth is the Allies ran out of military targets, but continued bombing raids regardless.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Israel is a secular state, not a theocratic one.

Sure they are. No favoritism displayed there at all.

 

[Agent327]

Oh, you might claim they are a favoritist state (whatever that means), but that doesn't mean Israel isn't a secular state.

 

[Silurian]

I'm always amused by "You disagree with me, so you must be undereducated."

I don't care what "the British" thought of the process. They were being stripped of their empire, fighting it, and losing...everywhere, including Palestine. In the brave new world of stripping the European powers of their empires the world, ie the UN under US control, said "establish a Jewish state" rather than saying "you lot that wanted Hitler defeated but have plenty of citizens who aren't exactly broken up over his views on Jews need to get that sorted." So, voila, a Jewish theocratic state is born, is allowed to throw open its borders to "refugees" who are hauling in wealth while booting out penniless non Jews as real refugees to become the neighbors' problem, and creates endless conflict in the Middle East for everyone else to have to deal with.

Initially every European nation thought this was a terrific solution. Not one of them put up the slightest resistance to having their Jewish citizens renounce them and show their heels. Not one of them said "wow, the explosive population growth of this new theocratic state is just bound to cause problems." They all said (somewhat appropriately) "The US created this mess, and they have the guns so let them deal with it." And here we are, dealing with it.

When Israel was formed after WW2 decolonisation was only just beginning. Emigrants were still leaving Europe in large numbers to colonies and former colonies in Africa and Asia until the 1970s. The USA had colonised the west within living memory. So it was still accepted that you could move to another land and use force and money to take the land.

I’m sure that some Europeans and Americans were glad to get rid of the Jews to the Middle East. Other Europeans and Americans may have thought that letting the Jews colonise part of the Middle East was a small compensation for the holocaust.

 

[Princeps]

My initial post was in response to Princeps. And my comment was "Interesting how any thread with the word Israel in it always ends up the same way, with violent fundamentalists claiming the country shouldn't exist." This is the third time I'm writing this now. I'm calling out fundamentalists, for example Princeps, who claim Israel shouldn't exist while simultaneously saying Jews are "privileged" at no point in time did I say anything whatsoever about "everyone".

I didn't say Israel shouldn't exist; I've argued that it should not have been created and that the burden of proving its existence is on Israel's apologists: demanding automatic recognition of Israel from Arabs and others is not a reasonable position to take. Personally, I'm in favor of a two-state solution; and I am unsympathetic to the argument that it wouldn't be in Israel's security interest. Some Israelis would become casualties as a result of a two state solution, but Israelis chose to live there and they will have to take the risk involved in empowering Palestinians to take control of their own half of the country.

The Jews of Europe and the Middle East were a relatively privileged minority: called a "middle-man minority" in sociology.

http://faculty.washington.edu/charles/562_f2011/Week 7/Bonacich 1973.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middleman_minority

Middleman minorities are more likely to save large portions of their incomes, highly appreciate education and science (have you ever heard of Jewish anti-intellectualism? neither have I), and they were unlikely to own farm land, which directed them toward the finances and money-lending. The Jews developed a culture that appreciated property rights, sound contract laws and the importance of civil society and liberal political systems. The Palestinian peasants, by contrast, were landed peasants and peons, subjugated by the Turks and raised in a culture that was largely ignorant of the advantages of such institutions.

 

[Saltwater]

I'm not interested in sociological theories. We're discussing the real world as it actually exists. Calling Jews "privileged" as they were being gassed to death en masse with insecticide is disgusting. People who are powerless are not privileged.

Amos Oz, probably the most well known Israeli writer, commented on the irony that Europeans used to yell at Jews to "go to Palestine" and now they yell at Jews to leave Palestine.

A few decades ago, Europeans were attacking and killing Jews for "not being European" and now the popular thing is to claim that Israelis are European and therefore they should be attacked. Even ignoring the fact that most Israelis aren't European (the head of the IDF is Moroccan for example) the irony is not lost on Israelis and the vast majority of Jews.

 

[SLAAKMAN]

Why do you stereotype Jews?

 

[useless]

I just want to you remember Saltwater, that it wasn't just Jews who were treated as vermin, stripped of even their humanity and dignity. Roma, The disabled, Homosexuals, Communists, Political opponents, Trade Unionists, Freemasons, Jehovah's witnesses, etc were also put to death en masse and i can very well believe that some of those groups aren't very well treated in Israel atm, even if they are not palestinian or even muslims.

I hate this sort of revisionism where the other victims are either not deigned important to mention or are just straight up ignored. The roma have had it the worst, they didn't even get a land for themselves, are considered little more than cockroaches by a lot of europeans, some on this very forum, and they are probably treated worse than Jews atm. I doubt the Roma will ever truly recover from the immense loss they suffered i mean some of their language and culture is now extinct because the of the immense genocide they suffered, a fact very often ignored and unlike the Jews, no one in europe gives a damn about that, in that way i would say the Jews are priviledged.

 

[Agent327]

Amos Oz, probably the most well known Israeli writer, commented on the irony that Europeans used to yell at Jews to "go to Palestine" and now they yell at Jews to leave Palestine.

A few decades ago, Europeans were attacking and killing Jews for "not being European" and now the popular thing is to claim that Israelis are European and therefore they should be attacked. Even ignoring the fact that most Israelis aren't European (the head of the IDF is Moroccan for example) the irony is not lost on Israelis and the vast majority of Jews.

The irony of what? No Europeans are demanding Israelis should leave Israel. In fact, Europe generally supported Israel, even in such a misguided adventure as the Suez intervention. Support, however, does not preclude criticism. Current day Israel has become a local power. With power comes responsibility. (Or political opportunism, if your name happens to be Netanyahu.)