Tweet
Peres breaking from Labour, to follow the PM?
Rafi?
Rafi?
-
"A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin Buber -
FREE PALESTINE!
(to avoid risk of becoming a club thread)Comment
-
you mean like a thread where you actually have to know something about the topic at hand?Originally posted by Bereta_Eder
FREE PALESTINE!
(to avoid risk of becoming a club thread)
"A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin BuberComment
-
As long as Palestine is free one could bare the ultranationalist jews
Comment
-
But Israel is more mature politically now than in the fifities, no? Mapai ruled with rough, machine type tactics that simply wouldnt go now, in an Israel that has a fuller, more independent civil society.
Also, a lot more jaded, cynical, and inactive.Comment
-
Yes. That's why so many of their PMs serve a full term in office....Originally posted by lord of the mark
But Israel is more mature politically now than in the fifities, no?
"I read a book twice as fast as anybody else. First, I read the beginning, and then I read the ending, and then I start in the middle and read toward whatever end I like best." - Gracie AllenComment
-
I give 5 points to North Korea for trying to invade Israel for its culture, great article. *claps*"Our words are backed with NUCLEAR WEAPONS!"Comment
-
back on topic
Looks from here like things are going relatively smoothly, but biggest obstacles not dealt with yet.
Lots of settlers leaving, but a couple of thousand protestors whove come in, are still digging in."A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin BuberComment
-
I heard the're waitng for a miracle.....
Seriously, from what I understand it is the deeply religious types amongst the settlers who are more "nationalists" for a Greater Israel and the rest are moderates who are more positively towards leaving Gaza, and that the majority of the Iraelis is for the disengagement anyway. Is this picture somehow correct or too simplistic?BlahComment
-
I'll let the Israelis answer that, but would like to point out a few things. 1. The religious settlers are NOT the "most religious" (jewish) elements of Israeli society. The most religious elements in Israeli society are more focused on narrowly religious issues, and tend to a more fatalistic attitude toward geopolitics. The settler movement is led by "modern Orthodox" who have historically been willing to compromise with secularism on domestic issues, but have (since 1967) staked out a fervent, almost messianic approach to the territories.Originally posted by BeBro
I heard the're waitng for a miracle.....
Seriously, from what I understand it is the deeply religious types amongst the settlers who are more "nationalists" for a Greater Israel and the rest are moderates who are more positively towards leaving Gaza, and that the majority of the Iraelis is for the disengagement anyway. Is this picture somehow correct or too simplistic?
The disengagement seems to be particularly traumatic for the Modern O, as it rips at this quid pro quo, and at their self identy, which blended nationalism in the sense of expansionism, with nationalism in the sense of respect for the Israeli state. While, AFAIK, there are few modern O who support disengagement, there are many who want no part of illegal acts of resistance - but some rabbis ARE calling for civil disobedience, and even for soldiers to disobey orders. And it is suspected that a few extremists may try violence. There is an interesting interview in todays Jerusalem Post, with the head of Bar Ilan Univ, who is Orthodox, but insists on full compliance with the law."A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin BuberComment
-
Not all those who oppose the disengagement are religious, or even right wing.
<-------------------Comment
-
As Az states, there are non-religious segments that oppose the disengagement plan. For example, a number are opposed to the idea of giving up land in exchange for nothing - not even promises of peace, and that because of that, the terrorists will claim credit for it. I think that's Netanyahu's complaint.Originally posted by Az
Not all those who oppose the disengagement are religious, or even right wing.
Maybe I missed it, Az, but why are you opposed to it?<-------------------"I read a book twice as fast as anybody else. First, I read the beginning, and then I read the ending, and then I start in the middle and read toward whatever end I like best." - Gracie AllenComment
-
The same fricking reason everyone was opposed to it just 2 years ago- It doesn't guarantee us nothing in return, and it will be a hotbed of terrorist activity. I don't trust Abu-Mazen's soft touch, and Bush's "promises" are slightly hotter than hot air.
Also, I don't see why the people should be evacuated from there forcibly. Why can't they stay there, if they want to? Is it just because they're jewish-Israeli, and future Palestine must be jew-free?
Besides, it leaves us with the same problems - Palestinian workers will have to be allowed into Israel, while having open borders to the world at the same time, and having our ability to strike at our enemies in Gaza greatly reduced.
So, it's not pragmatic, it's not ethical, It's nothing - It's an attempt to gather support for Sharon by both the public and the media, and to forgive him his corrupt government - And although rightists have been using this as an axe to grind against him since he proposed this plan, I am not tainted like them - I always knew that Sharon is a corrupt man, unfit to lead a country - The way he mislead his Prime Minister, and the entire country in 82' is enough proof of that.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Az
The same fricking reason everyone was opposed to it just 2 years ago- It doesn't guarantee us nothing in return, and it will be a hotbed of terrorist activity. I don't trust Abu-Mazen's soft touch, and Bush's "promises" are slightly hotter than hot air. "
Also, I don't see why the people should be evacuated from there forcibly. Why can't they stay there, if they want to? Is it just because they're jewish-Israeli, and future Palestine must be jew-free?
Besides, it leaves us with the same problems - Palestinian workers will have to be allowed into Israel, while having open borders to the world at the same time, and having our ability to strike at our enemies in Gaza greatly reduced.
So, it's not pragmatic, it's not ethical, It's nothing - It's an attempt to gather support for Sharon by both the public and the media, and to forgive him his corrupt government - And although rightists have been using this as an axe to grind against him since he proposed this plan, I am not tainted like them - I always knew that Sharon is a corrupt man, unfit to lead a country - The way he mislead his Prime Minister, and the entire country in 82' is enough proof of that.
I dont see why the ability of the IDF to operate in Gaza, as needed, is reduced by not having settlements. Were the settlements acting as military bases? Seems to me they were essentially hostages.
as for why jews shouldnt remain in Gaze, i would think thats frightfully obvious - if they stay, and the Pal Authorities abuse them, or are accused of abusing them, that creates another point of friction between israel and the PA.
I might add, that, as a Zionist, its good for Jews to live in the State of Israel. Its hard for foreigners without the language or connections, but for people living in the state, to depart the state, is hardly a Zionist act. Of course these folks seem to be more attached to the land of Israel than to the State of Israel. Thats a novum. There was a time, not so long ago, when the state did NOT control all the land between the Jordan and the Sea. at that time, aliyah was always defined as moving to the STATE of Israel. A diaspora Jew who desired to move to Hebron or Nablus to live under the King of Jordan, would have been considered unZionist, not to mention insane."A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin BuberComment
-
I dont see why the ability of the IDF to operate in Gaza, as needed, is reduced by not having settlements. Were the settlements acting as military bases? Seems to me they were essentially hostages.
Dude, it's not just evacuation of the settlements, but the retreat of the IDF to the green line. Which will put field intelligence gathering devices farther. Besides, Israel will also officially end the occupation of the region, so it will change status, and stuff. Waltzing in will be harder.
as for why jews shouldnt remain in Gaze, i would think thats frightfully obvious - if they stay, and the Pal Authorities abuse them, or are accused of abusing them, that creates another point of friction between israel and the PA.
It's their choice - if they want to stay, why not let them? The fact that it's a "friction point" is meaningless. Arab Israelis are also a "friction point". Forcing them out of their houses now would still be a crime.
I might add, that, as a Zionist, its good for Jews to live in the State of Israel. Its hard for foreigners without the language or connections, but for people living in the state, to depart the state, is hardly a Zionist act. Of course these folks seem to be more attached to the land of Israel than to the State of Israel. Thats a novum. There was a time, not so long ago, when the state did NOT control all the land between the Jordan and the Sea. at that time, aliyah was always defined as moving to the STATE of Israel. A diaspora Jew who desired to move to Hebron or Nablus to live under the King of Jordan, would have been considered unZionist, not to mention insane.
Don't forget that these people operate under the idea, that they won't exactly live in a peaceful fantasy land, but in a violent gaza strip. I share that assessment vis a vis what will happen when the IDF withdraws. Also, it's possible that these people would rather establish themselves as a force within a palestinian government.
You might as well say that arabs that consider themselves palestinian in Israel are hurting their national cause by staying.
Comment
Comment