Merged General Israel/Palestine discussion thread - Part 2

[Ziggurat]

Alex Jones will be even more insane then usual......

You're wrong.

It's "than", not "then".

 

[KumarS]

Right. Hamas fighting Israel, regardless of the costs to themselves and the civilians under their watch, raises the popularity of Hamas in the Arab world. That speaks volumes about the Arab world.

Problem is that the Arab world is there to stay.
While the US is on the leave from the ME

Do you think it's preferable for Palestinians to endure another generation of warfare just because they don't want to make this gesture? Does that really seem reasonable to you?

Russia and China are moving away from the US and start to support Iran
It may not be necessary anotehr generation before Israel gets wiped out things change

I think it's reasonable for Israel to want a negotiated peace and at least some basic assurances that a newly created Palestinian state won't just become another platform to launch further attacks against Israel.

The problem is that the PLO offered just that.
To live in peace on the 1967 borders
It is Israel who refused the 1967-based solution

"Jewish State" in this context means culturally Jewish, granting a "Right of Return" to Jewish people worldwide to become citizens of Israel, celebrating Jewish Holidays, and having Hebrew as it's official language. Even there they compromise, having Arabic and English also as official languages, and celebrating Muslim holidays as well.

Do you need to be called as a "Jewish State" for that?
Heck.. France has French as official language and has all French festivals, but heir are not called the Catholic State

I'm just stating what I observe.

Israel isn't claiming to be a victim, but people constantly demand that it's representatives justify their not playing victim.

The air strikes against Gaza are not the act of a victim, they're the actions of a people who refuse to be victims.

The constant haranguing about how many Gaza citizens are killed in a fight that Hamas started and refuses to stop...that's claiming victim-hood.

I think this is dead wrong.
But the most important point is that much of the Muslim and Arab world seems to be against your assessments
And this is what matters

 

[KumarS]

And Israel will fail again...just like they did the last 2 invasions of Gaza.

But...a lot of Arabs will be killed and property destroyed...so that should get someone's rocks off. However, when it is all over, Hamas will still be in charge.

And even more anger from the Muslim (and non-Muslim) world against Israel
Which will mean many problems for Israel in the next few years

 

[KumarS]

Ever considered telling this to Hamas?

Yes.
What about you telling to Obama and Israel?

And the thing about Jules is I don't even think he is sincere. He is just trolling.

Put me and the majority of the countries of the world in your list of "trolls" as well
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_UN_resolutions_concerning_Israel_and_Palestine
Americans are really on a power trip and they think they own the world
I think Israeli may soon become victims themselves of this power trip, when Iran will get nukes and the IS will expand to cover Iraq and Syria.

 

[Mycroft]

In 1967 Israel was within the 1967 borders.
They took land with a war.
This is not acceptable as from the UN said as from any people who has a minimum of moral ground.

It's not so cut and dry. UNSC resolution 242 lays out a formula of land for peace, but also demands that all parties respect each other's borders and agree to live in peace. That places demands all parties, not just the Israelis.

The PLO has offered to make peace with Israel on the 1967 borders.
Israel refused

Revisionism.

Israel keeps building settlements outside their previous borders evicting Palestinians from their homes.

Israel builds new buildings in existing settlements, there are no Palestinians to evict. Israel plans to keep Jerusalem, the holy city to Judaism, and it's surrounding areas. These are the "settlements" being built today.

Therefore, Israel is wrong on this
Since ISrael has never offered to go back to their borders, and a two-state solution based on the 1967 borders as the PLO has proposed long ago, Israel, the US and the people who support them are the ones to blame.

There have been almost 40 years of negotiations where Israel has pushed for a two state solution. Claiming that Israel doesn't want that is nothing short of a revisionist lie.

It's not very likely that any negotiated agreement will be exactly the 1967 borders, but the onus isn't on Israel to just unilaterally withdraw, it's for both Israel and the Palestinians to negotiate this resolution in good faith. At this moment, it is Fatah that is not coming to the table, and even if they did, they don't have the support of Hamas.

Hamas is to blame too, as they also do not accept a peaceful solution

Nice of you to concede some blame for Hamas.

By the way, were you aware there is a problem of Muslim Arabs stealing land from absentee Christian Arabs?

 

[KumarS]

Dawned on you in the end, didn't it. Problem is, they just never seem to learn. Once the IDF is done beating them into a pulp, they get right to licking wounds and preparing for their next wave of rockets, suicide bombers and messages of hatred and genocide.

I really fear for the civilians of Gaza now, but I honestly can't really blame the IDF for being fed up and wanting to end this cycle once and for all.

I came to the conclusion that the people of the West Axis (remembering another "Axis"), that is, the US and Israel, are only able to see their side of things
They do not accept that they are wrong too
It is always Hamas fault
If they do not accept the two state solution borders, this is Hamas fault as they do not accept
If they kill children, it is to get defended from Hamas
and so on ..
They are on a power trip same as the Nazis when they were invading Ukraine and killing people and blaming the victims for this

I can not see any way out between the Muslim nutjobs (Hamas) and the Western nutjobs (the US and Israel)
They are both wrong
They and both murderers
However, the Americans and the Israeli do not see this, they can only blame the other
This is very dangerous, as the pictures of the children killed are travelling around the Middle East and they are reinforcing the people who want Israel eliminated, and maybe the Jews eliminated as well
Fire drives more fire
And the power of the United States to force things on their direction using their military and economic power is getting weaker by the day.
But the Israeli are not seeing that, or, if they see that, they are still hoping to get away with it.
This may be a very bad delusion for them.
There are 1.4 billions Muslim in the world, and their economic and military power is growing (Indonesia, Iran, Pakistan, .. )
Changes happen quickly in history.
And people who ignore them usually do not end up well

 

[Ziggurat]

I think Hamas kind of knows, too.

And yet, they keep attacking Israel. Yet somehow, it never occurs to you that maybe they have some moral responsibility for the deaths that result from their actions, that people notice that Hamas started the fighting and continues the fighting, even though it gains nothing. Hamas keeps trying for a military solution, but it keeps failing to find one.

Face it: even the most Jew-hating Palestinians out there still want some actual dead Jews in exchange for all the pain they're getting in return. What's happening in Gaza right now is nobody's idea of victory for Hamas.

What? Is Israel just addicted to riding the Fail Train?

Again, that would be Hamas, not Israel. They just can't stop launching rockets, even though it doesn't work. And no, this really isn't changing world opinion. People like you hate Israel with just as much irrationality as before, and sensible people recognize that Israel is behaving as judiciously as you could expect a nation to while under attack. You're confusing the increasing shrillness of Israel's enemies for a shift in opinion, but it really isn't. It's just a sign of desperation, a cry of impotence.

 

[uke2se]

Was discussing this with a friend, and we came up with the theory that this might be the death rattle of Hamas. After all, they are quickly running out of friends (at least friends who can actually do something to help them) with the Muslim Brotherhood getting shut down in Egypt. It might simply be the case of Hamas having to expend all their munitions in a (hopefully) futile attempt to bring down as much suffering on the Palestinian people that it will prompt the intervention of someone - anyone really - and alter the situation on the ground.

 

[Ziggurat]

Israel is making a predictable pig's breakfast out it. Hamas is winning yards with every inch of further aggression from the israelis. They're the winners of this fight. Not in bodies (warm or cold) but of the leverage it gives them, at least in a short-term spec.

Leverage to do what? Stop Israel? No, they can't do that, and they wouldn't have to if they never launched the attacks in the first place. So what good, exactly, is this doing them? Nobody will come to their rescue this time. The Arab countries are too tied up with their own problems, they're already deeply at odds with Egypt (and missed the chance Egypt offered for a truce), Iran cannot exert any influence, European governments are siding with Israel, and Obama just doesn't care.

The losers in this case are, as usual, the residents of Gaza

Quite so. And they'd have to be stupid not to recognize that Hamas brought all this unnecessary pain down on their heads, and didn't even manage to inflict much hurt on Israel in return. Propaganda can do a lot, but it's not omnipotent. Do you honestly not think that will hurt Hamas's own credibility within Gaza? I mean, it's one thing to accept losses in order to inflict pain upon the enemy, but this? Nobody thinks this is a victory for Hamas. In fact, they've trapped themselves: they can't stop fighting precisely because they have nothing to point to where they can even claim a victory, so they can't afford to stop fighting because that would acknowledge their defeat.

 

[Ziggurat]

Was discussing this with a friend, and we came up with the theory that this might be the death rattle of Hamas. After all, they are quickly running out of friends (at least friends who can actually do something to help them) with the Muslim Brotherhood getting shut down in Egypt. It might simply be the case of Hamas having to expend all their munitions in a (hopefully) futile attempt to bring down as much suffering on the Palestinian people that it will prompt the intervention of someone - anyone really - and alter the situation on the ground.

It may be turning into that, but I don't think it started that way. I think they honestly didn't expect Iron Dome to be so effective.

 

[Mycroft]

For the 60 years they fought mostly with rocks
Give them tens of thousands of AK47s and bazookas and things may go very differently

More ignorance. In the '67 war Israel invaded the West Bank because the PLO was firing artillery into Israel. They don't have the weapons Israel has, but they've always had way better weapons than "rocks".

ButbutbutbutHamas

I guess that's become a universal dodge for you, but dodging the issue doesn't make it go away.

Should terms like "collective punishment" be applied to both sides equally, or should we only apply it to Israel?

You can play these games with definitions all you want, but so can anyone else. When you honestly look at who has the power to create peace, isn't it Israel? If they would just accept the two state solution and make peace with the PLO, then Hamas would have much less reasons to sell to their people that Israel is bad

Nice, but it doesn't work when you turn it around. Who is it that started this latest round of violence? Israel doesn't have the ability to unilaterally declare peace as long as Palestinians
continue to wage war.

If Hamas stopped firing rockets, recognized Israel's right to exist, endorsed previous agreements made by the PNA under Fatah, it would be very hard for Israel not to make peace. Even if the current conservative Israeli government weren't willing, that government would change with new elections.

By contrast, when Israel makes unilateral gestures towards peace, it's met with further violence.

 

[KumarS]

It's not so cut and dry. UNSC resolution 242 lays out a formula of land for peace, but also demands that all parties respect each other's borders and agree to live in peace. That places demands all parties, not just the Israelis.

PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat to Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin:
Mr. Prime Minister,
The signing of the Declaration of Principles marks a new era in the history of the Middle East. In firm conviction thereof, I would like to confirm the following PLO commitments:
- The PLO recognizes the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security.
- The PLO accepts United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338.
- The PLO commits itself to the Middle East peace process, and to a peaceful resolution of the conflict between the two sides and declares that all outstanding issues relating to permanent status will be resolved through negotiations.
- The PLO considers that the signing of the Declaration of Principles constitutes a historic event, inaugurating a new epoch of peaceful coexistence, free from violence and all other acts which endanger peace and stability. Accordingly, the PLO renounces the use of terrorism and other acts of violence and will assume responsibility over all PLO elements and personnel in order to assure their compliance, prevent violations and discipline violators.
In view of the promise of a new era and the signing of the Declaration of Principles and based on Palestinian acceptance of Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, the PLO affirms that those articles of the Palestinian Covenant which deny Israel's right to exist, and the provisions of the Covenant which are inconsistent with the commitments of this letter are now inoperative and no longer valid. Consequently, the PLO undertakes to submit to the Palestinian National Council for formal approval the necessary changes in regard to the Palestinian Covenant.
Sincerely,
Yasser Arafat
Chairman, Palestine Liberation Organization
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/recogn.html

Revisionism.

Liar.

Effectively, the PLO recognized Israel's right to exist within pre-1967 borders, with the understanding that the Palestinians would be allowed to set up their own state in the West Bank and Gaza
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine_Liberation_Organization

Israel builds new buildings in existing settlements, there are no Palestinians to evict. Israel plans to keep Jerusalem, the holy city to Judaism, and it's surrounding areas. These are the "settlements" being built today.

If they are interested in a two-state solution based on the 1967 borders, waht is the point to keep building settlements outside such borders

There have been almost 40 years of negotiations where Israel has pushed for a two state solution. Claiming that Israel doesn't want that is nothing short of a revisionist lie.

Dunno about Israel, but Nethanyahu backed it on 2009 for the first time
By ISABEL KERSHNER
Published: June 14, 2009
JERUSALEM — The prime minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, on Sunday endorsed for the first time
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/15/world/middleeast/15mideast.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Two-state solution based on which borders?
Israel keeps 99% of the West Bank while the Palestinians keep 1% would still technically be a two-state solution

It's not very likely that any negotiated agreement will be exactly the 1967 borders, but the onus isn't on Israel to just unilaterally withdraw, it's for both Israel and the Palestinians to negotiate this resolution in good faith.

Haha!
The good faith of whom? Obama? Nethanyahu?
Only free men can negotiate!
You can not negotiate when your opponent has nukes and jets and you have nothing

At this moment, it is Fatah that is not coming to the table, and even if they did, they don't have the support of Hamas.

Proabbly they got tired of making concessions just to be asked for more concessions. Understandable

Nice of you to concede some blame for Hamas.

Re-read my posts.
I have admitted Hamas responsibilities long ago.

It is you guys who are supporting who is killings of children, I am not

 

[uke2se]

It is you guys who are supporting who is killings of children, I am not

Yes you are. You are cheerleading it tremendously, posting vile fantasies about how the Muslim world would crush Israel, all the while cracking sick jokes about the holocaust.

Your posts are quite sickening.

 

[Mycroft]

Let` s hope that they find an interim agreement and a truce.
Differently from the warmongers, I do not like to see Palestinian and Israeli people killed

You should have used the word "or", unless you meant that to sound as dark as it does.

 

[KumarS]

More ignorance. In the '67 war Israel invaded the West Bank because the PLO was firing artillery into Israel. They don't have the weapons Israel has, but they've always had way better weapons than "rocks".

Yes, but the difference betwen Israel guns and theirs was an abyss.
Now that Iran is making guns and can smuggle, the difference is likkely to get reduced

I guess that's become a universal dodge for you, but dodging the issue doesn't make it go away.

Should terms like "collective punishment" be applied to both sides equally, or should we only apply it to Israel?

You can call it as you wish, but certainly it is not equal as the number of victims on each side is not equal

Nice, but it doesn't work when you turn it around. Who is it that started this latest round of violence? Israel doesn't have the ability to unilaterally declare peace as long as Palestinians
continue to wage war.

And Palestinians as well do not have the ability to unilaterally declare peace as long as Israelis continue to wage war.
It works both ways

If Hamas stopped firing rockets, recognized Israel's right to exist, endorsed previous agreements made by the PNA under Fatah, it would be very hard for Israel not to make peace. Even if the current conservative Israeli government weren't willing, that government would change with new elections.

The PLO did just that in 1988 and what did they got?
More land stolen

By contrast, when Israel makes unilateral gestures towards peace, it's met with further violence.

Their gestures of peace are just a stop between two bombing operations

 

[KumarS]

You should have used the word "or", unless you meant that to sound as dark as it does.

I do not like Israeli children killed
I do not like Palestinian children killed

I do not even think we should talk about nationality when about children

 

[uke2se]

You can call it as you wish, but certainly it is not equal as the number of victims on each side is not equal

Doesn't matter. You are dodging, and you know it.

And Palestinians as well do not have the ability to unilaterally declare peace as long as Israelis continue to wage war.
It works both ways

No it doesn't, and yes the Palestinians do have that ability. They could simply stop firing their rockets.

The PLO did just that in 1988 and what did they got?
More land stolen

A lie. Never happened.

Their gestures of peace are just a stop between two bombing operations

Another lie.

 

[uke2se]

I do not like Israeli children killed
I do not like Palestinian children killed

I do not even think we should talk about nationality when about children

I don't believe you. I doubt you care very much about Palestinian children, as you seem to have no problem with Hamas using them as human shields, and I'm quite certain you don't care at all about Israeli children (at least of the Jewish persuasion).

 

[Mycroft]

PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat to Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin:
Mr. Prime Minister,
The signing of the Declaration of Principles marks a new era in the history of the Middle East. In firm conviction thereof, I would like to confirm the following PLO commitments:
<snip>

Yep, Arafat wrote those letters as part of peace negotiations between him and Rabin, but they were never acted upon. To this date, almost 20 years later, the PLO charter remains unchanged, and this supposed recognition of Israel can only be found in these letters.

Liar.

Effectively, the PLO recognized Israel's right to exist within pre-1967 borders, with the understanding that the Palestinians would be allowed to set up their own state in the West Bank and Gaza
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine_Liberation_Organization

As much of a fan of Wikipedia as I am, it's unfortunate that on controversial topics it's often biased and inaccurate. Arafat didn't recognize Israel's right to exist within the '67 borders, he called upon Israel to withdraw to the '67 borders.

Read this article to learn how much teeth pulling it took to even get that much from Arafat, and note the reason the UN met in Geneva that year instead of New York is because the US wouldn't grant Arafat a Visa...because he wouldn't recognize Israel.

http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_1967to1991_plo_israel_exist_1988.php

And this is the actual text of Arafat's speech. He renounces terrorism too, he didn't mean that either.

http://www.al-bab.com/arab/docs/pal/pal5.htm

If they are interested in a two-state solution based on the 1967 borders, waht is the point to keep building settlements outside such borders

You're the only one who keeps adding "based on the '67 borders." Israel plans to keep Jerusalem and its surrounding areas. Israel has always negotiated based on a two-state solution, but Jerusalem is the Holy City to Judaism. Rational or not, they plan to keep it.

Dunno about Israel, but Nethanyahu backed it on 2009 for the first time

Yes, you don't know. Filling in the gaps of what you don't know is tedious, especially when you feel empowered to make all kinds of proclamations despite your ignorance.

Netanyahu backed a two state solution for the first time in 2009. Netenyahu is the head of Likud, an Israeli political party that has always been against Palestinian independence. The news here is that by 2009 support in Israel for a two state solution was so strong that even the head of the political party that opposes Palestinian independence said he would support it under certain conditions.

Two-state solution based on which borders?
Israel keeps 99% of the West Bank while the Palestinians keep 1% would still technically be a two-state solution

Yes, that's true, but nobody is suggesting Palestinians would only get 1%. Palestinians not getting 100%, however, is a common assumption.

And I can't think of any good reason why they should get 100%, can you? If it's 98%, 95% or even 90%, it's still an independent state and it's still a chance for them to get on with their lives and raise children who know something other than violence. Wouldn't you agree?

Haha!
The good faith of whom? Obama? Nethanyahu?
Only free men can negotiate!
You can not negotiate when your opponent has nukes and jets and you have nothing

First, not at all true.

Second, you seem to have a neat rationalization for Palestinians never to negotiate. Without negotiation, there is no peace. Do you not want peace?

Proabbly they got tired of making concessions just to be asked for more concessions. Understandable

You seem to think Palestinians have made more concessions than I do. Please educate me by listing all these concessions.

Re-read my posts.
I have admitted Hamas responsibilities long ago.

It is you guys who are supporting who is killings of children, I am not

I think you are supporting the killing of children. As long as you refuse to look at what really drives this conflict, you support its continuation, and with it the blood and casualties, including children, that go along with it.

 

[Mycroft]

I do not like Israeli children killed
I do not like Palestinian children killed

I do not even think we should talk about nationality when about children

I can't read your mind, but this statement comes across as disingenuous after you so recently cheered Palestinians getting nuclear weapons and some other comments you've made.