Why is it wrong to call this Apartheid (Isreal)?

[Wezil]

Pretty large "subset". They elected Hamas.

[DinoDoc]

Be fair. The other choice was Fatah.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by CyberShy


You talk about proportional?
I'd say that after the decades of violence against Israel, both from nations (1948, 1956, 1967, 1973, 1991) and terrorists (1st intifada, 2nd intifada, Hamas Gaza) Israel's reaction is still quite proportional.

I'd say that Israel 'd better end this conflict for once and for all. Strike hard, and after you have clearly scared your enemies, you can start talking about peace.

It's not a very popular thing, but peace can only occur after the war has brought a clear winner. As long as both parties get the feeling that they can win, the war will continue. (stupid example: Clinton/Obama)

It's sad when all you care about it winning the war.

[Wezil]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Be fair. The other choice was Fatah.

Good point.


Was the bombing of Germany or Japan wrong? I'm sure not all citizens supported their government. Collective punishment.

[BeBMan]

I think it's pretty ****ty. Yes, there are security concerns, but with that argument you could justify anything. I'd accept it as temporary thing in case of an acute and concrete threat, but not as permanent solution because of the general situation.

[snoopy369]

The problem is the Israelis treating the Palestinians like second class citizens - because they do consider them to be second class citizens (or rather, not citizens at all, of course). Security concerns are not, ever, a reason to treat someone like a second class citizen; however, they are often an excuse to treat someone like the second class citizen you already feel them to be.

[chequita guevara]

Actually Snoop, the Israelis are treating them worse than second class citizens. Israel has a racially divided society. White, European Jews are First class. Arab Jews are second class citizens. African, Indian, and Asian Jews are Third Class. Christian and Arab Israelis are Fourth Class. The rest aren't any kind of citizen. They have the same legal status as Black slaves had in the U.S., no rights any white man needs respect.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Wezil
Pretty large "subset". They elected Hamas.

Hamas was mostly elected, not for the stance on terror and Israel, but because of Fatah's legendary corruption and the need for social services, which Hamas was already providing.

[Wezil]

Yes fatah was bad but the Hamas rocket fire at Israeli civilians was not an unknown at the time of the vote.

[Geronimo]

wouldn't a more equitable solution be to build a small "safe lane" parallel to the highway for those afraid of terrorist attacks to use and leave the original freeway open for use? The safe lane would have controlled access like a toll lane and those able to use it would have had security and background checks.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by CyberShy
Tell me about what I'm ignorant and If you come with some good arguments instead of this I may even turn over to 'your side'.

If that were capable of being done, it would have been done in one of the five million Israel threads before this one.

Let's consider some of your "examples" of violence against Israel, 1956 and 1967. Both times, Israel started the war. Some may consider violence and war justified for closing the Straights of Tiran, but regardless, Israel initiated the violence in these cases. It is beyond question. In 1981, Israel launched an offensive war, in response to PLO shelling of Israel, that was in turn a response to Israel air strikes into Lebanon, which was a reprisal for an attempted assassination carried out by the Abu Nidal organization. "Abu Nidal, abu shmidal. We need to screw PLO!" was Israel's response.

In 1948, Israel was every bit as responsible for the war as the other countries. It was much less a war of all Arab countries against Israel as it was of all countries against Palestine, including Israel. Israel had a secret agreement with Tranjordan, which has come out, to divide Palestine between them. It was also a war with Arab states against each other, as one of Egypt's columns was aimed straight at Transjorden. Lebanon's [i]Christian[i] armies were only occupying the part of Palestine that was assigned to the Arabs. Syria tried to seize a part of Israel that the French maps had assigned to Syria. While at the conclusion of the first truce, all sides resumed fighting, it was Israel that violated the 2nd and 3rd truces.

Clearly the War of Attrition and the Yom Kippur wars were the fault of the Arabs. Operation Litani, while a response to a PLO raid, was clearly an over-reaction, but it wasn't unprovoked.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Wezil
Yes fatah was bad but the Hamas rocket fire at Israeli civilians was not an unknown at the time of the vote.

Nor was it the most important issue. To use an example for American history, it was like backing Boston's Sons of Liberty (who were using terrorist acts against British tax collectors) against the British Crown. Yes, the Sons of Liberty were tar and feathering British tax collectors, but the acts of the British government overall were worse.

[Wezil]

Yeah okay, but I think the issue was whether collective punishment was right/wrong/justified/evil, etc.

To collectively punish a population for the actions of their elected government is reasonable imho if that government is engaged in attempting to kill innocent and random civilians in my country.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Hamas was mostly elected, not for the stance on terror and Israel,

That and Fatah was already sponsoring attacks on Israel. This led to the Kill teh joos plank of the Hamas platform being a non-issue for the electorate.

[Zkribbler]

Why is it wrong to call this Apartheid ?

It's not Apartheid, which was based on the belief that some ethnic groups are inherently inferior.

It is Jim Crow, which is based on the belief that the State can and should provide separate but equal facilities to different ethnic groups.