israeli aggressors building more housing in East Jerusalem

[Sirotnikov]

Wave your flag or speak out against it. It's that simple. Not complicated.

I don't see anything wrong with waving my flag, while speaking out against some bad peoples' actions, and doing what I can to stop it.

Just because the bad people do what they do in the name of my flag, does not mean that its theirs, or that I renounce my country / flag over it.


While we both agree that what many bad people do is bad, we differ about many things still, in grand strategy as well as tactics.

+I think it is perfectly legitimate for Israel to claim it has historical, religious and political rights in the west bank.

+I think it is perfectly legitimate for Israel to persue a compromise in its favor against the Palestinians.

+I think it is perfectly legitimate for Israel to deploy the IDF to tackle palestinian terrorism via different measures, until that problem is solved. Notice that the current IDF strict regime did not exist for years prior to the 2000 intifada.

+I think it is perfectly legitimate for Israel to build a barrier protecting its citizens, even if the barrier's path is on land that is in question. Barriers can and have been moved after a peace agreement. The death of terror victims is permanent.

+I think it is perfectly legitimate for Israel to employ tactics such as assassination of terrorist leaders, or perform required military tasks in civilian areas, due to the presence of combatants there.

+I think it is perfectly legitimate to put a blockade on Gaza to curb the rocket fire coming from there, and to stop the weapons and money flow to Hamas, who is an active enemy of Israel.


Everything that I did not mention here, I do not support.
Unless of course I have forgotten something.

So Siro, settlers are like stupid lemmings?

what in my description has lead you to see them as stupid lemmings?

they are not stupid and very unlemmingy.

They set out goals and are quite good at achieving lots of them. They are organized, good in PR, and so on.

A good lot of them are good (though sometimes misguided) bunch who are motivated by patriotism and faith.

A scary group (that's growing!) has become very problematic. It has been carried away by messianic notions and does not accept (in spirit and in practice) the legitimacy of the Israeli state or the majority of citizens in Israel. That group I'm afraid of, and I denounce.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
I don't see anything wrong with waving my flag, while speaking out against some bad peoples' actions, and doing what I can to stop it.

Just because the bad people do what they do in the name of my flag, does not mean that its theirs, or that I renounce my country / flag over it.

I respect that as a personal preference. I think the main issue that I have with what you said is that only the Arabs are causing terrorism.

I do wish that there were more people on each side who critisize their own sides actions.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Arrian
Even if one agrees that the creation of Israel (either at all, or simply how/where it was actually created) was a mistake, the only way that will be undone is by massive violence (in comparison to the relatively low-level violence between the Israelis and Palestinians over the last few decades). While Agathon appears to find this prospect quite appealing, I cannot imagine it will be anything but disasterous for all concerned. If faced with a truely existential threat, Israel will fight for its life (understandably so, even if you think Israel should never have been).

If one actually gives a damn about the people involved, one can only hope for some sort of morally messy (by necessity) compromise.

-Arrian

The problem I see with ignoring what i see as the clear moral problems that came about the foundartion of israel have nothing to do with the continuation of Israel. They have everything to do with trying to be honest about possible solutions.

I am deeply troubled when people who claimt to believe in democracy, human and civil rights, and then support the violation of those principles for other principles WHILE claiming that it is not in fact a repudiation. I prefer for people to be honest. I respect someone more who would tell me that the jewish right to a homesland was greater than some subset of Arab having that land than someone who claims to believe in democracy and national soverignty who then tries to explain the validity of the actions during the Paris Conference.

Not accepting that there are serious problems with the history that lead to Israel is an act taken to delegitimize Palestinian grievences. its harder to say someone is utterly wrong and savage and stupid if they happen to have one valid argument, isn't it? Much better to say that the palestinians did it all to themeselves, or that they acted savagelt because they are backwards, or better yet, endless Anti-semetic, and not to accept that they too are victims in this.

The Jews were victims of massive European anti-semitism that in the end turned genocidal. The Palestinians were victims of a racists paternalistic western (mainly European but not only) attitude that infantilized other cultures and gave Europe the "right" to walk all over their rights.

the sad thing is that two victims were made to compete for the same land. The thing is, in this contest, the Jews win, not because their victimhood is more valid. How can victimhood have scales of validity? They win because the west was so repulsed by what they did to the Jews that they have spent the last 50 years trying to attone. but the latent racism againsty Brown people's is still around, so we can still victimize Palestinians. After all, they are only crazy brown Muslims. Not even part of the "Judeo-Christian" tradition (As if islam's part of teh Abrahamic tradition can just be ignored).

The problem that exists of course is that both sets of victims have valid grievences, but neither is willing to accept that, ebcause to accept that is to perhaps give up the dream of some "national" homeland, ignoring the sad reality that neither group is going anywhere. Now I am an anti-nationalist, who despises the whole notion of "nationalism", so I denouce any state built on that notion, whether those meant to be excluded are Jews or Palestinians. Sadly, the stench and draw of nationalism remains strong. But perhaps the first step to breaking the hold of that worst of ideas from the French revolution is coming to accept that both nations are victims, and that victimhood is not a contest.

[Barnabas]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov


what in my description has lead you to see them as stupid lemmings?

Every week there are a dozen new such things created, and every week they are destroyed by IDF. And every week the settlers go on back.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by Kidicious


I respect that as a personal preference. I think the main issue that I have with what you said is that only the Arabs are causing terrorism.

I do wish that there were more people on each side who critisize their own sides actions.

I criticise my side.
(obviously less often on this site )

but I don't call it terrorism when it ain't.

When crazy right wingers tried to put blow up devices in palestinian school yards, it was terrorism.

IDF tactics are not terrorist, as they do not target civilians, and contrary to what you're gonna say - they do try to consider local innocent bystanders.

[Sirotnikov]

lol @ barnabas.

yes they use their youth movements as lemmings.

[Sirotnikov]

The problem I see with ignoring what i see as the clear moral problems that came about the foundartion of israel have nothing to do with the continuation of Israel. They have everything to do with trying to be honest about possible solutions.

I don't think this would have anything to do with solutions.

Solutions should be practical with view of the future. Not rely on the past.

Had palestinian negociators not relied on the past and demanded Israeli declarations of guilt, we'd have a working sustainable peace for 7 years now.

I prefer for people to be honest. I respect someone more who would tell me that the jewish right to a homesland was greater than some subset of Arab having that land than someone who claims to believe in democracy and national soverignty who then tries to explain the validity of the actions during the Paris Conference.

I'm honest.

I think that the jewish right to a homeland as greater than the right of the locals to prevent jews from a homeland. I also justify it using historical means (which you often contest).

I think it does nothing to diminish of my commitment to democracy and human rights (which has its limits since i believe in realpolitik).

I also think that the political processes of the time were perfectly legitimate, because that was the standard at the time. I don't think that newly developed ethic convictions should be retro-active. It's like trying people for laws that didn't exist at the time.

Not accepting that there are serious problems with the history that lead to Israel is an act taken to delegitimize Palestinian grievences. its harder to say someone is utterly wrong and savage and stupid if they happen to have one valid argument, isn't it? Much better to say that the palestinians did it all to themeselves, or that they acted savagelt because they are backwards, or better yet, endless Anti-semetic, and not to accept that they too are victims in this.

It is much more enlightened to say that the Palestinians weren't savage and stupid. But sadly, they were, and that's how they got in this predicament.

Palestinian grievance over the past is not very important. We should deal with the present. At present we have anywhere between 2.5 and 4 million pasletinians who demand, and deserve a homeland in a location to which they are historically connected to (like, but not more than the Jews).

What ever follies I believe the Palestinians have done in the past, does not affect my opinion that they deserve a state of their own, next to Israel.

I do not deny that this is the logical place for a palestinian state. Nor do I deny them ever being here in the past.

I do deny claims that they are more entitled to this land than Jews. I deny claims that every and all Palestinians have lived here peacefully for centuries, and then someday evil Jews came and started making a mess. The reality was more complex, for both sides.

The Palestinians were victims of a racists paternalistic western (mainly European but not only) attitude that infantilized other cultures and gave Europe the "right" to walk all over their rights.

Perhaps.
But they were also victims of almost non-existant political identity, a piss-pour political leadership and a tendency towards violence where politics was due.

As far as I am aware of, the early roots of the Zionist movement did not see a single national state, but some sort of a Jewish-Arab federation. Thoughts of this kind were even shared with some local Arab leaders. This quickly proved impossible due to the violent reaction of most though.

but the latent racism againsty Brown people's is still around, so we can still victimize Palestinians. After all, they are only crazy brown Muslims. Not even part of the "Judeo-Christian" tradition (As if islam's part of teh Abrahamic tradition can just be ignored).

The Palestinians could have had a state in near perfect 1967 borders by now, with eastern Jerusalem as their capital.

There is no victimization of Palestinians going on.
Not only did they walked out on a reasonable deal, they also started a violent campaign after it. Israel was perfectly right in clamping them down.

to accept that both nations are victims, and that victimhood is not a contest.

I agree to that part. But Israel can't agree to it publicly and never should, as it can be politically exploited to destroy it.

I don't deny that the Palestinians were screwed by all involved. Even by Jews.

But I refuse to lay the blame solely on Jews. It was alot of their own making and of their fellow Arabs, of the Brits that messed around.

Somehow, every time someone admits that the Jews have had a hand in the Palestinians' crappy luck, it is used to delegitimize Israel and call for its destruction. Then some people claim that if not for Zionism everything would be great, there would be no terrorism or war EVAR.

This is nonsense, yet some people believe it with all their hearts.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
but I don't call it terrorism when it ain't.

Stoning people so that they will go away is terrorism. You shouldn't say that it isn't if you want to look like you critisize your side.

[Shrapnel12]

Then you cause terrorism. Don't deny it. You know you do. There's two huge causes of terrorism that you want to simply ignore; terrorism itself and ethnic cleansing.

Ya and women who wear slutty outfits and walk in dark alleys cause rape. People walking in the city with fat wallets cause robbery. Being black causes nazi wannabe racists to hate them.

You're making a fool of yourself. Stop saying such stupid things.

Oh I'm sorry, did the communism movement give up on that whole violent overthrow of the government thing? My bad.

[Sirotnikov]

Stoning people so that they will go away is terrorism. You shouldn't say that it isn't if you want to look like you critisize your side.

If i had ever called palestinian stone throwing terrorism, rather than rioting, I take it back.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by GePap

The problem I see with ignoring what i see as the clear moral problems that came about the foundartion of israel have nothing to do with the continuation of Israel. They have everything to do with trying to be honest about possible solutions.

I am deeply troubled when people who claimt to believe in democracy, human and civil rights, and then support the violation of those principles for other principles WHILE claiming that it is not in fact a repudiation. I prefer for people to be honest. I respect someone more who would tell me that the jewish right to a homesland was greater than some subset of Arab having that land than someone who claims to believe in democracy and national soverignty who then tries to explain the validity of the actions during the Paris Conference.

Not accepting that there are serious problems with the history that lead to Israel is an act taken to delegitimize Palestinian grievences. its harder to say someone is utterly wrong and savage and stupid if they happen to have one valid argument, isn't it? Much better to say that the palestinians did it all to themeselves, or that they acted savagelt because they are backwards, or better yet, endless Anti-semetic, and not to accept that they too are victims in this.

The Jews were victims of massive European anti-semitism that in the end turned genocidal. The Palestinians were victims of a racists paternalistic western (mainly European but not only) attitude that infantilized other cultures and gave Europe the "right" to walk all over their rights.

the sad thing is that two victims were made to compete for the same land. The thing is, in this contest, the Jews win, not because their victimhood is more valid. How can victimhood have scales of validity? They win because the west was so repulsed by what they did to the Jews that they have spent the last 50 years trying to attone. but the latent racism againsty Brown people's is still around, so we can still victimize Palestinians. After all, they are only crazy brown Muslims. Not even part of the "Judeo-Christian" tradition (As if islam's part of teh Abrahamic tradition can just be ignored).

The problem that exists of course is that both sets of victims have valid grievences, but neither is willing to accept that, ebcause to accept that is to perhaps give up the dream of some "national" homeland, ignoring the sad reality that neither group is going anywhere. Now I am an anti-nationalist, who despises the whole notion of "nationalism", so I denouce any state built on that notion, whether those meant to be excluded are Jews or Palestinians. Sadly, the stench and draw of nationalism remains strong. But perhaps the first step to breaking the hold of that worst of ideas from the French revolution is coming to accept that both nations are victims, and that victimhood is not a contest.

I don't argue that one must ignore the moral questions surrounding the foundation of Israel. But I do argue that harping on them is counterproductive if one wants to see peace. First off, it is usually brought up in order to lay blame (on Europe, the US, Israel, etc) and back calls for Israel's destruction, rather than to simply show (as you pointed out) that the Palestinians have a valid grievance. Second this naturally leads to the discussions of ALL the moral questions surrounding the creation of Israel, including those damaging to the Palestinian side, which will just extend the blame game.

Maybe they should both blame Canada...

-Arrian

[Shrapnel12]

Laying blame is pointless in the ME. Everyone shares some blame, but who is to blame has nothing to do with the issue. It is merely a political ploy to use against each other. The true heart of the matter is a battle for religious supremacy between Judaism and Islam. Islamists want one thing, the total and absolute domination of Islam in the ME and the total eradication of all other religions. This is the only issue of import and the rest is a mere cover. Thus there will never be peace in the ME until the majority of Muslims learn religious tolerance. I don't see this happening for decades, maybe centuries, or maybe never.

[Eli]

The first great impediment to a permanent agreement is that the Palestinians don't know what they want.

There is an acceptable agreement that will be approved by a large majority of the Israeli voters and Parliament. ~95% of the territories, with land exchange for the rest. East Jerusalem as the Palestinian capital, and a creative solution for the Ancient City (like putting into under UN control).

There is no similar agreement that the Palestinians can agree on.

The second problem is that the Palestinians are political fanatics and not pragmatists. They fail to recognize that they are in a position of terminal weakness. They do not understand that as the player with the least power, they must be the ones who do everything to find a compromise. Instead, they seem to be doing everything to avoid one.

[Eli]

The Palestinians have had an amazing opportunity. They exist adjacent to, and in close symbiosis with a rich, western, highly technological open society. The potential benefits are enormous, and they far outweigh whatever value can be extracted from a few more percent of land in the Judean Desert or a symbolic ownership of the Temple Mount.

They could've enjoyed amazing growth rates, work and education opportunities, a better access to the west than almost any other developing nation. But they squandered all of this on the altar of idiotic national pride, forgetting that while Israel might lose 1-2% of it's GDP growth rate for a couple of years until the wall is built, they get a actual GDP drop of tens of percents.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
If i had ever called palestinian stone throwing terrorism, rather than rioting, I take it back.

Ok whatever. I know how much to value what you say.