Israel VS Palestine, who do you support?

[Ayn Rand]

What is your take for instance on the Settlements on the Westbank, based on God-given rights, dislocating the population who are unfortunate enough to already be there?

God-given rights? It has more to do with the Six-day war and the Yom Kippur war. Israeli respect for their Arab neighbour's territorial integrity didn't stop those neighbours from sending hundreds of thousands of troops through those areas to try and destroy Israel.

Just out of interest, do you think East Prussia should be returned to Germany, or Kosovo to Serbia?

 

[BurnEmDown]

You know most early Zionists were German, and they developed along German lines of thinking about nationality, i.e. racial ones. Jewish representation in Palestine was tiny up until the 1930's.

That's not true at all, most early Zionists were from Poland and Russia if they came from Europe, and actually most of them didn't come from Europe, but from middle eastern countries and north Africa. At the start of the 20th century there were hardly 400,000 Jews in Germany, yet in Russia there were over a million and close to a million in Poland if I'm not mistaken. There's no way most of them were German.

And Jewish representation in Palestine was big enough to convince the British to work towards creating their own country there.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

God-given rights? It has more to do with the Six-day war and the Yom Kippur war. Israeli respect for their Arab neighbour's territorial integrity didn't stop those neighbours from sending hundreds of thousands of troops through those areas to try and destroy Israel.

So, what is your take on them?

 

[Ayn Rand]

So, what is your take on them?

To be honest, I think the Israelis would have happily handed the whole area back, if it were not for the relentless suicide bombings, terrorist attacks, sniping and rocket attacks they have been exposed to. I don't think any self-respecting people are going to hand back territory that was taken in self-defence during a war to a people who have shown no real commitment to peace or mutual respect.

Given the relentless attacks on Israel, I think they should just totally disregard what their enemy thinks until that enemy learns to embrace peace and asks for forgiveness. Until then, they should just carry on doing what they need to do because it doesn't make a difference - they will just be attacked anyway.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

To be honest, I think the Israelis would have happily handed the whole area back, if it were not for the relentless suicide bombings, terrorist attacks, sniping and rocket attacks they have been exposed to. I don't think any self-respecting people are going to hand back territory that was taken in self-defence during a war to a people who have shown no real commitment to peace or mutual respect.

You forget that a lot of Israelis consider the area theirs by divine command. You think those people would happily hand the whole area back? Have you forgotten the riots that sparked the last time they tried to give it back?

Example of such a sentiment:
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/LDE68Q06W.htm

YITZHAR, West Bank, Sept 26 (Reuters) - Jewish settler Avraham Binyamin says any Israeli withdrawal from occupied land would be like severing a limb from his body.

As one of some 300,000 Israelis living in enclaves built on West Bank land that Palestinians seek for a state, Binyamin expresses a view held by many that the area is a Jewish biblical birthright and must never be relinquished, not even for peace.

Though not all settlers object to the U.S.-sponsored peace talks that began on Sept. 2, many are fiercely opposed and say they will do whatever is needed to keep their homes and prevent an accord.

"The national being of any people, particularly the Jewish people, is like a body, you cannot give up parts of your body," said Binyamin, 25, a teacher from Yitzhar, a settlement known for its tense relations with neighbouring Palestinian villages.

The religiously devout father of two says the 2.5 million Palestinians living in the West Bank should be relocated to neighbouring Arab lands.

"I can sometimes very much understand their pain and their need," he says. "But from the national perspective, it's either me or them -- and I prefer it to be me."

Given the relentless attacks on Israel, I think they should just totally disregard what their enemy thinks until that enemy learns to embrace peace and asks for forgiveness. Until then, they should just carry on doing what they need to do because it doesn't make a difference - they will just be attacked anyway.

So, in summary you believe two wrongs make a right? There's no moral dilemma for you to displace people who have fired as many rockets at Israel as you and I have?

 

[Ayn Rand]

You forget that a lot of Israelis consider the area theirs by divine command. You think those people would happily hand the whole area back? Have you forgotten the riots that sparked the last time they tried to give it back?

Example of such a sentiment:
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/LDE68Q06W.htm


So, in summary you believe two wrongs make a right? There's no moral dilemma for you to displace people who have fired as many rockets at Israel as you and I have?

I don't think it's as simple as saying "two wrongs don't make a right" because Israel was attacked so many times, with such clearly evil intentions. Israelis are free and alive today because they stood on their own feet and defended themselves. They don't owe anything to their Arab neighbours - why be polite to someone who is spitting in your face? At some point your self-respect requires you not to keep giving in to them and handing back the land they lost when they were trying to slaughter you.

Do the Arabs there deserve to be displaced? Of course many of them don't. But a lot of them will have voted for parties such as Hamas [they had their chance at democracy and spat at that] and given aid and comfort to terrorists and their organisations.

Of course, those Arabs who do stand up and complain about the terrorist organisations are likely to receive a beating, knee-capping, job loss, arrest and even torture or death at the hands of their fellow citizens. It is harsh on them - really harsh - but it can't all be left to Israel to clean up and sort out. The international community has to step in and defend those Arabs who are innocent, which begins with protecting their democratic rights and their right to have a voice in their own political process.

But just try and bring up human rights in Palestine - people don't want to listen. They want to blame Israel, and they don't see how important democracy and free speech inside Palestine is for resolving this problem. The terrorists do - which is why they make sure to silence their own people, so they can carry on using them as pawns in Jihad. Fundamentally I think it is the Palestinians who need to do the reforming and the current trend of blaming Israel is very shortsighted, misguided and counter-productive. The pressure needs to be directed at Palestine where it is urgently needed.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

But you agree now they wouldn't happily give up the land even for peace?

And when I ask: "There's no moral dilemma for you to displace people who have fired as many rockets at Israel as you and I have?" you dismiss any moral dilemma since "But a lot of them will have voted for parties such as Hamas [they had their chance at democracy and spat at that] and given aid and comfort to terrorists and their organisations.". So I take that as a no.

Do you think that there's Balance in the Force? For every person who "want to blame Israel" for everything, there is someone who'll excuse Israel for everything. And I used that Force quote intentionally. Do you feel you can compare the to a Star Wars movie with All Good on one side and All Bad on the other?

Please, no rant again this time. I'm not in it to be your wailing wall

 

[GhostWriter16]

God-given rights? It has more to do with the Six-day war and the Yom Kippur war. Israeli respect for their Arab neighbour's territorial integrity didn't stop those neighbours from sending hundreds of thousands of troops through those areas to try and destroy Israel.

Just out of interest, do you think East Prussia should be returned to Germany, or Kosovo to Serbia?

Well, let me say this, unless God specifically tells them to "Take their land back" I don't think they should just do so, but in their minds "God-given" MIGHT have something to do with it.

I don't think we should support Israel "Because they are the Chosen Nation" though. I think we should support them because they are a Democracy. Not because they are "The Chosen Nation." God made it clear that if they DIDN'T follow him they would be destroyed anyway...

I don't think it's as simple as saying "two wrongs don't make a right" because Israel was attacked so many times, with such clearly evil intentions. Israelis are free and alive today because they stood on their own feet and defended themselves. They don't owe anything to their Arab neighbours - why be polite to someone who is spitting in your face? At some point your self-respect requires you not to keep giving in to them and handing back the land they lost when they were trying to slaughter you.

Do the Arabs there deserve to be displaced? Of course many of them don't. But a lot of them will have voted for parties such as Hamas [they had their chance at democracy and spat at that] and given aid and comfort to terrorists and their organisations.

Of course, those Arabs who do stand up and complain about the terrorist organisations are likely to receive a beating, knee-capping, job loss, arrest and even torture or death at the hands of their fellow citizens. It is harsh on them - really harsh - but it can't all be left to Israel to clean up and sort out. The international community has to step in and defend those Arabs who are innocent, which begins with protecting their democratic rights and their right to have a voice in their own political process.

But just try and bring up human rights in Palestine - people don't want to listen. They want to blame Israel, and they don't see how important democracy and free speech inside Palestine is for resolving this problem. The terrorists do - which is why they make sure to silence their own people, so they can carry on using them as pawns in Jihad. Fundamentally I think it is the Palestinians who need to do the reforming and the current trend of blaming Israel is very shortsighted, misguided and counter-productive. The pressure needs to be directed at Palestine where it is urgently needed.

Honestly, what Israel SHOULD do is invade Palestine, execute their Hamas overlords (As a terrorist organization, they don't have a right to a trial, but give them one anyway just to show we are the better people), and liberate them. Then they can either give them their own MODERATE state or autonomous region, or give them citizens rights. I don't really care which. But Israel invading Palestine is wise because they are run by terrorists, who are also responsible for the human rights situation.

Now, Israel isn't perfect by any means, and they could improve quite a bit, but they are basically a free nation with good intentions.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Invading a country to get rid of an oppressive overlord. Where have I heard that before?

Well Domination, I like the idea. I think the whole thing could be over in about 6 months time and I believe the Israelis will be greeted as liberators. I also have a really snappy name for the invasion

Operation Palestinian Freedom.

 

[Ayn Rand]

Honestly, what Israel SHOULD do is invade Palestine, execute their Hamas overlords (As a terrorist organization, they don't have a right to a trial, but give them one anyway just to show we are the better people), and liberate them. Then they can either give them their own MODERATE state or autonomous region, or give them citizens rights. I don't really care which. But Israel invading Palestine is wise because they are run by terrorists, who are also responsible for the human rights situation.

Yes you're right, it's what they should do, but unfortunately the World is crazy and they would be seen as aggressors rather than liberators. The Jihad against Israel would just get stronger and, as Ziggy pointed out, it would last a long time. Also, calling Hamas 'overlords' is the right terminology. The moderate Arabs haven't got a chance with those terrorists in charge.

The problem is that the only people in that area who are consistently able to operate in support of good are the Israelis themselves - and there are limits to the sacrifices that can be demanded from Israel.

Of course, until recently the EU was supporting moderate Palestinians - Tony Blair put a massive amount of his credibility on the line to get an international group together to help Palestine. They built sewage plants and carried out investments, but Hamas saw the threat to their Jihadist agenda and started their rocket attacks to drive out the moderates and justify continuing war - no doubt in line with the instructions from Tehran.

The Palestinians are just pawns - although the majority of them are quite willing pawns. My attitude towards Palestinian "peace" proposals is "I'll believe it when I see it".

 

[HannibalBarka]

That's not true at all, most early Zionists were from Poland and Russia if they came from Europe, and actually most of them didn't come from Europe, but from middle eastern countries and north Africa. At the start of the 20th century there were hardly 400,000 Jews in Germany, yet in Russia there were over a million and close to a million in Poland if I'm not mistaken. There's no way most of them were German.

You are absolutly right. The vast majority of the jewish people living in the Holy Land in the early XXith century were actually "sefaridic" jews who have been living there for ever or "migrated" from the arab world or Spain (after the Inquisition). Very few "zionist" (all of them European because it was a European "idea") had already made their way to Palestine and achieved their Alya. And most of them were Russian.

And Jewish representation in Palestine was big enough to convince the British to work towards creating their own country there.

The jewsih representation in Palestine was tiny back than (less than 9% in 1919) and the majority of those jews were also "foreign" to the Zioinst idea and to the Government of her Majasty. Balfour Declaration was definitly not the result of this representation (it's even in spite of it actually). It has more to do with internal UK politics, and its relation to the Jewish community in the US (yes the US) (many US Jews supported the central powers against the allies because they were see less antisemite (especially Russia).

 

[boogaboo]

I said I support a 2 state solution.
The problem is, as it has always been, politics, political parties, and politicians - on both sides.
I support a unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state, by either them or Israel.
The temporary border in such a declaration will probably be determined by the current wall supported by IDF, with PA protesting.
But then, the Palestinians will lose their "we are occupied, help us against Israel", and will have to negotiate the borders like 2 countries.
With permanent borders, there is no "illegal settlement".

I want to note and emphasize that currently Gaza IS NOT a part of Israel NOR the Palestinians.
It is a Hamas rules area, with very different population* from the west bank, supported by Iran and Syria, no one knows how this story will end, or if they will ever be "Palestinians".

*The Gaza population are genetically mostly from N.Africa, and were Egyptians before 1967.
The west bank population itself doesn't see the Gaza population as the same ethnicity (although Arab).

 

[GhostWriter16]

Yes you're right, it's what they should do, but unfortunately the World is crazy and they would be seen as aggressors rather than liberators. The Jihad against Israel would just get stronger and, as Ziggy pointed out, it would last a long time. Also, calling Hamas 'overlords' is the right terminology. The moderate Arabs haven't got a chance with those terrorists in charge.

The problem is that the only people in that area who are consistently able to operate in support of good are the Israelis themselves - and there are limits to the sacrifices that can be demanded from Israel.

Of course, until recently the EU was supporting moderate Palestinians - Tony Blair put a massive amount of his credibility on the line to get an international group together to help Palestine. They built sewage plants and carried out investments, but Hamas saw the threat to their Jihadist agenda and started their rocket attacks to drive out the moderates and justify continuing war - no doubt in line with the instructions from Tehran.

The Palestinians are just pawns - although the majority of them are quite willing pawns. My attitude towards Palestinian "peace" proposals is "I'll believe it when I see it".

The big thing with Palestine, which makes it different then other invasions, is:

1. Israel ALREADY wants control of the land. They could easily make Palestine an autonomous region, with its own government, but still have enough control to prevent parties like Hamas from winning elections.

2. Palestine has literally no standing military, they can't really stop an invasion.

3. If the world thinks they are aggressors, heck with them, they already think that.

4. Liberation invasions work when done right anyway.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I said I support a 2 state solution.
The problem is, as it has always been, politics, political parties, and politicians - on both sides.
I support a unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state, by either them or Israel.
The temporary border in such a declaration will probably be determined by the current wall supported by IDF, with PA protesting.
But then, the Palestinians will lose their "we are occupied, help us against Israel", and will have to negotiate the borders like 2 countries.
With permanent borders, there is no "illegal settlement".

I want to note and emphasize that currently Gaza IS NOT a part of Israel NOR the Palestinians.
It is a Hamas rules area, with very different population* from the west bank, supported by Iran and Syria, no one knows how this story will end, or if they will ever be "Palestinians".

*The Gaza population are genetically mostly from N.Africa, and were Egyptians before 1967.
The west bank population itself doesn't see the Gaza population as the same ethnicity (although Arab).

I have a personal question for you, since you usually sound reasonable on this subject (although we've had our disagreements) and are actually from there.

Does it bother you that people like us talk and argue and claim moral superiority on one side or the other, while we actually have no idea what really is going on there? I happened to notice that many times when Israelis themselves (exceptions exist of course) comment, their sentiments usually have little in common with the rabid pro-Israeli Johnny foreigner. So there's a lot of people claiming to argue as a spokesperson for you.

And I'd wager you're not amused by the anti-Israeli camp of course.

These kind of threads must be torture for you

 

[boogaboo]

Does it bother you that people like us talk and argue and claim moral superiority on one side or the other, while we actually have no idea what really is going on there?

It bothers, because the inside politics of Israel is very complexed, the limitations on each PM, and the many organizations that try to subdue Israel.
We still get rockets daily from Gaza into civilian areas, but the CNN news will show the next humanitarian aid to Gaza.
What a huge support the people of Gaza are getting after sending rockets at Israel (remind you we pulled out of there years ago) and choosing Hamas as government.
And yes, their economy is hit from the blockade, but... I lately take to think -
Isn't the ordinary Iranian (much bigger population) on a blockade by the UN??
Why aren't there ships saying (as they should) : "Bomb nuclear facilities, remove the economic blockade on the people"?

About Politics:
Because we inhibit many cultures in a 7 million state - different kinds of belief in religion, different religion, different origins that carried along some traditions.
That all results in MANY political parties. In fact, last elections, no party crossed 25% of the votes, but still they organized a coalition for government (50%), where one member doesn't agree with the next on basic issues. It's chaos. And corruption.
Netanyahu is blocked from some actions by right-wing parties he added in his coalition, and I'm not sure he wants to do peace.
And in the Palestinian side it is worse - if their leader is not seen as "strong" he is usually not able to make real concessions (and indeed none made, and their schooling system is still near fascist in it's one-sidedness of telling History).

So, about moral superiority.. it is human and very Naive.
People like Roger Waters (love his music) protesting about the wall, but not suggesting anything when suicide bombers were coming into Israeli cities. Naive. Rejecting the wall is like rejecting a border between states, or fences between neighbors, saying it "alienates"...

And I'd wager you're not amused by the anti-Israeli camp of course.

These kind of threads must be torture for you

I know their repeated arguments are filled with disinformation.
Sometimes, when I try to get into it, it is a torture.
Nowadays, I'm not always entering the bulk of stuff, just spending some time in off-topic

 

[Verbose]

Honestly, what Israel SHOULD do is invade Palestine, execute their Hamas overlords (As a terrorist organization, they don't have a right to a trial, but give them one anyway just to show we are the better people), and liberate them. Then they can either give them their own MODERATE state or autonomous region, or give them citizens rights. I don't really care which. But Israel invading Palestine is wise because they are run by terrorists, who are also responsible for the human rights situation.

The COULD try that. Except of course, it's no solution at all. All it would do is have the Israelis make themselves targets to anyone with the hankering and a handgun. As these are already targets for the Israelis as is, for them it will be no significant change EXCEPT now they will have opportunities of taking the fight to the Israelis in their own streets. This is why reoccupation is not an Israeli option.

And if Israel goes in, and erects to props of a democracy, it will suffer the problems similar political entities like the Weimar Republic did — not bad, but imposed and thus impopular. Hamas will get more votes, and the of course Israel can decree it was the "wrong" result and invade again and break some more heads. Or else it's a sham election with Israel picking the sides and no really worth the bother as far as democracy goes.

In any case Israel remains the occupier, and the oppressor, but now has the misfortune of having the lives of their soldier put on the line. They feel kind of iffy about that. How'bout the US doing some more invading instead, hm?

 

[Verbose]

Rejecting the wall is like rejecting a border between states, or fences between neighbors, saying it "alienates"...

Except it's Israel which went and crapped all over the borders by building in on the Palestinians side. It gobbles up about something around 10% of the territory of West Bank by now. A wall on the Israeli side, by all means, no problem at all. This is different.

 

[trader/warrior]

Except it's Israel which went and crapped all over the borders by building in on the Palestinians side. It gobbles up about something around 10% of the territory of West Bank by now. A wall on the Israeli side, by all means, no problem at all. This is different.

Problem is that the wall is built to protect the israelis, not the israeli state, so if they excluded the settlements it would have very little effectiveness at stopping terror as they would just attack the settlements. Thats what I remember Boogaboo telling me anyway.

And there is little doubt the wall has been effective. It's a really difficult freedom vs security issue. Personally I think the wall will worsen the conflict in the long term, though.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Problem is that the wall is built to protect the israelis, not the israeli state, so if they excluded the settlements it would have very little effectiveness at stopping terror as they would just attack the settlements. Thats what I remember Boogaboo telling me anyway.

And there is little doubt the wall has been effective. It's a really difficult freedom vs security issue. Personally I think the wall will worsen the conflict long term, though.

The wall, like the highways, were built to further isolate the Palestinians, and impede their movement between settlements.

 

[GhostWriter16]

The COULD try that. Except of course, it's no solution at all. All it would do is have the Israelis make themselves targets to anyone with the hankering and a handgun. As these are already targets for the Israelis as is, for them it will be no significant change EXCEPT now they will have opportunities of taking the fight to the Israelis in their own streets. This is why reoccupation is not an Israeli option.

And if Israel goes in, and erects to props of a democracy, it will suffer the problems similar political entities like the Weimar Republic did — not bad, but imposed and thus impopular. Hamas will get more votes, and the of course Israel can decree it was the "wrong" result and invade again and break some more heads. Or else it's a sham election with Israel picking the sides and no really worth the bother as far as democracy goes.

In any case Israel remains the occupier, and the oppressor, but now has the misfortune of having the lives of their soldier put on the line. They feel kind of iffy about that. How'bout the US doing some more invading instead, hm?

Just declare Hamas an illegal terrorist organization (Its not really a political organization) and execute as many of its members as possible. Don't allow Hamas to be placed on the ballot.