|
On August 18 2014 08:03 docvoc wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2014 06:57 Catch]22 wrote:
Jormundr, you make it sound like the Israelis are only and always the agressors in the wars from 1948 to now, whereas this was not my understanding of the situation. Maybe I misinterpreted you. No, you're pretty close to what he's been saying all thread lol. Also Scarecrow, I'm talking about other western countries. Look at recent civilian casualties from Russia or the U.S. or other countries that have had wars in the last 40 years and Israel is significantly cleaner. You can argue that point, but it is unfair to give another side lee-way just because they are less akin to western democracy, that kind of relativity is impossible to truly hold up.
That's not a useful comparison. Israel fights wars on a smaller scale against forces that are far weaker than it. There's also the recurrent Gaza issue where Israel preemptively bombs all the police stations and then labels them combatants. That's both immoral and illegal under international law; Police are not military and they are not viable targets unless they take part in the hostilities. Hence the criticism for preemptive strikes against police stations.
|
On August 18 2014 08:05 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2014 06:57 Catch]22 wrote:
Jormundr, you make it sound like the Israelis are only and always the agressors in the wars from 1948 to now, whereas this was not my understanding of the situation. Maybe I misinterpreted you. Despite what he says, Isreal have been the one that dealt the most damage to its surrounding neighbors than vice versa due to help from the USA and its allies. What Israel should do in this case is to prove themselves to be the one with the higher morals, especially since they've personally experienced such forces beforehand (from Romans + German Nazis) by not aggressively attacking the citizens which they are failing to do. But that's not to say that the Hamas army isn't doing messed up stuff but Israel have been worse in the humanitarian department. Again, I'm personally not exactly surprised that of all these wars. In psychology, there is a concept of "anger redirection", Israel have experienced genocide by the Germany and have bottled up their angers underneath. Coupled that with extreme ridiculous of religious belief of "promise land", they want to lash out. That's understandable. And if they feel that they can bully other nations with superior weapons, they will certainly do so. But don't expect the other neighbor nations to just sit there as sitting ducks, there will be reciprocation. This war will most likely be a back and fourth between the two sides until one side takes it overboard and the entire world will take arms against the one that crosses the line first. And I don't expect the Islamic states to cross the line first due to their archaic weaponry. But I'm hoping for both to actually sit down and talk about the situation rather than letting their religion ideology cloud over their judgement.
That is definitely not a sound analysis of the individual Israeli or the motives of Israeli politics. The average Israeli knows next to nothing of the actual timeline of events that lead to the current state of Israel. The Israeli narrative is one of continued victim-hood and triumph against overwhelming odds, when they have without a doubt been Goliath to the muslim David. Most Israeli's have been fed the lie that they had a right by victory to ethnically cleanse the Palestinians in 1948 and that they again gained that right when they took the rest of Palestinian territory in 1967. With this belief in mind the current treatment of Palestinians is viewed as benevolent when it is in fact barbaric.
As for the mindset of Israeli government, I would argue that since its inception until the 2000s, it was governed by shrewd leaders who operated under the assumptions of realpolitik. Post 2000s it has been governed by morons who had no idea how to properly run the machine built by their predecessors. This ineptitude has been greatly magnified by the increased spread of information in a world where international news is becoming less and less consolidated.
|
On August 18 2014 07:46 Jormundr wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2014 06:35 radiatoren wrote:On August 18 2014 03:00 Jormundr wrote:On August 17 2014 13:13 Sermokala wrote:On August 17 2014 10:25 Jormundr wrote:On August 17 2014 09:17 Sermokala wrote:On August 14 2014 10:10 Broetchenholer wrote:
The UNHRC is not a joke, because
Austria
Czech Republic
Estonia
France
Germany
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Romania
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
United States of America
are in it. Look, i can do that as well. Do you maybe want to call the germans biased against Israel? Or the USofA? Or are they maybe known for their human rights infringements? And btw? What's wrong with Romania? I woul really like to know what your exact problem with that country is, and why you think it's representative are unable to determine whether another nation commited war crimes or not.
And even if North Korea called Israel out for having violated human rights in this war, it's cynical and reflects badly on North Korea, but does not at all reduce the claim that Israel (and Hamas) might have violated human rights. Its a joke beacuse of how many more times they call out Israel out for human rights abuses so infinitly more then any other country that violates human rights infinatly more. Arabs are treated better in Isreal then any Arab nation in the middle east. And yet they're the one that gets all the attention when civil wars rage in africa and north korea still exists for some reason. Somehow "Israel: We might be better than North Korea." doesn't sound like a very good motto. As to your (incorrect) claim that Israel treats arabs better than neighboring countries, please do inform me which of these countries has 2/3 of their arab population in internment camps. You're being horribly obtuse. The joke is this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Council#IsraelAlmost have of all resolutions passed are against Israel, while Sudan a country that has deep abuses (and split in half recently beacuse of it) has been given a free pass. North Korea keeps its entire country in one giant internment camp. The population that lives in Israel didn't have the intifada's that caused Israel to put up the barriers between Palestinian territories and isreal territories. Would you rather Israel to tear down all those walls and allow more suicide bombings and terrorist attacks to happen? If hamas used the money and resources that they were given to better their people instead of spending it on trying to kill jews the Palestinian populace would be in a lot better spot and there wouldn't be a need for the walls. I mean you have them literally passing a resolution praiseing sri lanka for doing the same exact thing in 2009 that isreal just did in gaza. You don't seem very educated here, as you seem to be repeating what's aired on fox news. Small history lesson: First Intifada: Started with the number of Israeli settlers (and corresponding military troops to keep the natives in their huts) doubling between 1984 and 1988 and then again between 1988 and 1994. Add to this the constant talk in the knesset in the 80s of moving the palestinians out of the territories (a practice known as ethnic cleansing) and you have a powder keg which exploded when Israeli forces killed a few too many of their prisoners. This turned into Ferguson, but with the police being the army and the army shooting palestinians wholesale. Since this didn't work (WHEN THE FUCK HAS THIS EVER WORKED?) after killing about 300 they decided that instead of killing people who threw rocks at them, after 300 kills they switched to using plastic bullets and sticks to beat the shit out of all the palestinians. This benevolent gesture was lost on the ungrateful palestinians at the time. Then we have Yitzhak Rabin, who was the first person to actually offer peace in any reasonable terms to the palestinians in 35 years. It is not surprising that there were massive protests in Israel over this. He was shot to death by a National Zionist who (surprise) didn't want peace with the palestinians. (This is important because it comes up again later) Fast forward to the camp david talks in 2000 and you have Israel offering less than half of what was offered during the Oslo Accords, continuing settlements and Yasser Arafat walking out on the 'be our bitch, you don't have a choice' talks. Then two months later Ariel Sharon, the man responsible for the Sabra and Shatila massacre, decided he would show the world how docile the Palestinians segregated in eastern Jerusalem could be by doing a fucking photo op on the temple mount shortly after the 18th anniversary of his massacre. Funnily enough, he was another National Zionist. This lead to rioting in east jerusalem, which led to Israeli soldiers showing once more that they don't give two shits about Palestinian lives, which lead to a massive palestinian uprising in east jerusalem, the west bank, and the gaza strip. This was the beginning of the second Intifada, which was significant because it was the first time that Israel felt the civilian casualties they had been bestowing on the Palestinians for the past 40 years, although Israel still managed to kill palestinians at a rate of more than four to one. This ended in 2005 with Israel finishing the majority of its fortifications in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank (which were started in the early 90s) which turned them into internment camps (whereas before they were internment camps without actual walls). Israel has, since its inception, proven without exception that it is hellbent on the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians from their own land. They showed this when they started to arrive, they showed it when they were bombing the british, they showed it in the ethnic cleansing of 1948 when they literally drove the palestinians from their homes. They have shown it ever since with the consistent brutality of their military towards Palestinians, their apartheid treatment of both Palestinians and Israeli Muslims through law, and the occasional heavy handed massacre. They have shown it by slowly taking away the lands, rights, lives, and freedom of the palestinians without ever offering so much as an apology. You ask why the United Nations doesn't care about sudan when they have peacekeeping forces in Sudan and have hosted meetings between opposing sides in sudan. The UN is actively involved there, whereas Israel has barred any UN involvement on the ground. North Korea doesn't factor in because their abuses are common knowledge, it's just that nobody is willing to fight China. China's abuses are also well documented, but nobody is willing to fight China, Russia, the US, and the EU. Israel is a target of UN resolutions because the international community is what has protected Israel since its inception. You can ask why people in the west are so critical of Israel and I can tell you at the very least it is because for secular jews like me and liberal jews outside of Israel it seems that the National Zionists learned way too much from the National Socialists. We do not want an Israel which stands on the throats of the Palestinians simply for existing, which has been the modus operandi of Israel since it took over the territories in 1967. A few additions to counterbalance it a bit: Hamas and Islamic Jihad were infuriated by the killings near the Al-Aqsa mosque in 1990 during the first intifada. It caused these organized islamic extremists to carry out a number of stabbings on israelis. PLO didn't manage to contain them and at the time it was still questioned if they indeed had given up arms and their international terrorism for good. Up through the 1990's Islamic Jihad conducted a number of suicide bombings against Israel. The second intifada was initially driven by the Camp David breakdown followed by Sharons visit to the Al-Aqsa mosque in 2000 to show that Likud (Netanyahus party) would never ceed it to Palestine. A year later it evolved into a lot of suicide bombers from Islamic Jihad and Hamas starting their firing of rockets at Israel. The problems have been severely reduced with the fences that effectively have stopped the suicide bombings and the Iron Dome for the rockets. The attack tunnels used by the extremists in Palestine is just the latest threat to Israels security. While Israel has conducted something most other nations would call state terror and ethnic cleansing, the palestinean authorities have been completely inept at assuring Israels safety. The nuances are lost in time. The real problems in Palestine has to do with the extremist militants having too much of a say compared to political authorities. Some would also call the firing of rockets from Hamas since their military coup in 2007 for state terror. The palestinean authorities in Gaza have been somewhere between inept and willfully disobedient at curtailing extremism. The lack of trust in them as a guarantee against attacks on Israel is what is killing most hope for a solution. https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/news/middle-east/13436-israel-wants-a-truce-that-does-not-include-a-halt-on-assassinationsMossad + IDF's publicly disclosed assassinations alone can be given as a reason for Hamas's ineptitude. Furthermore, the lack of leadership that Israel has fostered in Gaza does not explain why they grip tighter and tighter onto the throat of the far more cooperative west bank. This mainly provides evidence that Israel wants to do to the west bank what it did to gaza; Gaza has been a tremendous success. If they were smart enough to cut down the majority of the civilian casualties in Gaza by making a more pyrrhic ground invasion, they could literally keep the palestinians locked up until a major military power develops in the middle east. Unfortunately, the far right politicians are inept and they're stupid enough to throw away international support to maintain a Russian level of propaganda control over their citizens. In this sense, the west bank and gaza barriers are by far the least important in isolating the Israeli public from sympathizing with the Palestinians. The average Israeli thinks that Palestinians are basically sore losers. As you may have seen in this thread, they are not alone, with many here saying that Israel "won" that land. Sadly, Israel has not yet learned that conquerors have a responsibility to protect the people of the lands that they conquer, and it's terrifying that Israel has instead chosen an ethnic cleansing because I fear that Israel may one day reap what it has sown.
Netanyahu is looking at Hamas as exclusively a terror organisation and has thus far refused to even accept their legitimacy as a negotiation partner. It is part of the reason things are so screwed up in the negotiations. But when it comes down to it, Hamas has not delivered much more than rockets and attack tunnels they can use for crimes against Israel. They are no saints either.
When it comes to the West Bank, there is no denying that Israel is abusing them royally, through the expansion of the Allon plan with extention of area C and therefore annexation of more of the most important part of the West Bank. That is the real definition of the extreme right wing in Israel. The more liberal side is more pragmatic in negotiations, while the extreme right wants more and more concessions without giving anything to the palestinians. The political extremism is absolutely two-sided between Hamas and Israel. Israel has elected a government of ultra-extremists with no tolerance for palestinians. Gaza has elected a government with extremists with no tolerance for Israelis. Both use a certain level of one-sidedness of information to ensure domestic support for their actions. Problem is that while Gaza is a militarist on militarist, the West bank is pragmatist on militarist. Abusing the West Bank for something happening in Gaza is part of why things are so difficult to deescalate.
|
On August 18 2014 08:49 radiatoren wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2014 07:46 Jormundr wrote:On August 18 2014 06:35 radiatoren wrote:On August 18 2014 03:00 Jormundr wrote:On August 17 2014 13:13 Sermokala wrote:On August 17 2014 10:25 Jormundr wrote:On August 17 2014 09:17 Sermokala wrote:On August 14 2014 10:10 Broetchenholer wrote:
The UNHRC is not a joke, because
Austria
Czech Republic
Estonia
France
Germany
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Romania
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
United States of America
are in it. Look, i can do that as well. Do you maybe want to call the germans biased against Israel? Or the USofA? Or are they maybe known for their human rights infringements? And btw? What's wrong with Romania? I woul really like to know what your exact problem with that country is, and why you think it's representative are unable to determine whether another nation commited war crimes or not.
And even if North Korea called Israel out for having violated human rights in this war, it's cynical and reflects badly on North Korea, but does not at all reduce the claim that Israel (and Hamas) might have violated human rights. Its a joke beacuse of how many more times they call out Israel out for human rights abuses so infinitly more then any other country that violates human rights infinatly more. Arabs are treated better in Isreal then any Arab nation in the middle east. And yet they're the one that gets all the attention when civil wars rage in africa and north korea still exists for some reason. Somehow "Israel: We might be better than North Korea." doesn't sound like a very good motto. As to your (incorrect) claim that Israel treats arabs better than neighboring countries, please do inform me which of these countries has 2/3 of their arab population in internment camps. You're being horribly obtuse. The joke is this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Council#IsraelAlmost have of all resolutions passed are against Israel, while Sudan a country that has deep abuses (and split in half recently beacuse of it) has been given a free pass. North Korea keeps its entire country in one giant internment camp. The population that lives in Israel didn't have the intifada's that caused Israel to put up the barriers between Palestinian territories and isreal territories. Would you rather Israel to tear down all those walls and allow more suicide bombings and terrorist attacks to happen? If hamas used the money and resources that they were given to better their people instead of spending it on trying to kill jews the Palestinian populace would be in a lot better spot and there wouldn't be a need for the walls. I mean you have them literally passing a resolution praiseing sri lanka for doing the same exact thing in 2009 that isreal just did in gaza. You don't seem very educated here, as you seem to be repeating what's aired on fox news. Small history lesson: First Intifada: Started with the number of Israeli settlers (and corresponding military troops to keep the natives in their huts) doubling between 1984 and 1988 and then again between 1988 and 1994. Add to this the constant talk in the knesset in the 80s of moving the palestinians out of the territories (a practice known as ethnic cleansing) and you have a powder keg which exploded when Israeli forces killed a few too many of their prisoners. This turned into Ferguson, but with the police being the army and the army shooting palestinians wholesale. Since this didn't work (WHEN THE FUCK HAS THIS EVER WORKED?) after killing about 300 they decided that instead of killing people who threw rocks at them, after 300 kills they switched to using plastic bullets and sticks to beat the shit out of all the palestinians. This benevolent gesture was lost on the ungrateful palestinians at the time. Then we have Yitzhak Rabin, who was the first person to actually offer peace in any reasonable terms to the palestinians in 35 years. It is not surprising that there were massive protests in Israel over this. He was shot to death by a National Zionist who (surprise) didn't want peace with the palestinians. (This is important because it comes up again later) Fast forward to the camp david talks in 2000 and you have Israel offering less than half of what was offered during the Oslo Accords, continuing settlements and Yasser Arafat walking out on the 'be our bitch, you don't have a choice' talks. Then two months later Ariel Sharon, the man responsible for the Sabra and Shatila massacre, decided he would show the world how docile the Palestinians segregated in eastern Jerusalem could be by doing a fucking photo op on the temple mount shortly after the 18th anniversary of his massacre. Funnily enough, he was another National Zionist. This lead to rioting in east jerusalem, which led to Israeli soldiers showing once more that they don't give two shits about Palestinian lives, which lead to a massive palestinian uprising in east jerusalem, the west bank, and the gaza strip. This was the beginning of the second Intifada, which was significant because it was the first time that Israel felt the civilian casualties they had been bestowing on the Palestinians for the past 40 years, although Israel still managed to kill palestinians at a rate of more than four to one. This ended in 2005 with Israel finishing the majority of its fortifications in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank (which were started in the early 90s) which turned them into internment camps (whereas before they were internment camps without actual walls). Israel has, since its inception, proven without exception that it is hellbent on the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians from their own land. They showed this when they started to arrive, they showed it when they were bombing the british, they showed it in the ethnic cleansing of 1948 when they literally drove the palestinians from their homes. They have shown it ever since with the consistent brutality of their military towards Palestinians, their apartheid treatment of both Palestinians and Israeli Muslims through law, and the occasional heavy handed massacre. They have shown it by slowly taking away the lands, rights, lives, and freedom of the palestinians without ever offering so much as an apology. You ask why the United Nations doesn't care about sudan when they have peacekeeping forces in Sudan and have hosted meetings between opposing sides in sudan. The UN is actively involved there, whereas Israel has barred any UN involvement on the ground. North Korea doesn't factor in because their abuses are common knowledge, it's just that nobody is willing to fight China. China's abuses are also well documented, but nobody is willing to fight China, Russia, the US, and the EU. Israel is a target of UN resolutions because the international community is what has protected Israel since its inception. You can ask why people in the west are so critical of Israel and I can tell you at the very least it is because for secular jews like me and liberal jews outside of Israel it seems that the National Zionists learned way too much from the National Socialists. We do not want an Israel which stands on the throats of the Palestinians simply for existing, which has been the modus operandi of Israel since it took over the territories in 1967. A few additions to counterbalance it a bit: Hamas and Islamic Jihad were infuriated by the killings near the Al-Aqsa mosque in 1990 during the first intifada. It caused these organized islamic extremists to carry out a number of stabbings on israelis. PLO didn't manage to contain them and at the time it was still questioned if they indeed had given up arms and their international terrorism for good. Up through the 1990's Islamic Jihad conducted a number of suicide bombings against Israel. The second intifada was initially driven by the Camp David breakdown followed by Sharons visit to the Al-Aqsa mosque in 2000 to show that Likud (Netanyahus party) would never ceed it to Palestine. A year later it evolved into a lot of suicide bombers from Islamic Jihad and Hamas starting their firing of rockets at Israel. The problems have been severely reduced with the fences that effectively have stopped the suicide bombings and the Iron Dome for the rockets. The attack tunnels used by the extremists in Palestine is just the latest threat to Israels security. While Israel has conducted something most other nations would call state terror and ethnic cleansing, the palestinean authorities have been completely inept at assuring Israels safety. The nuances are lost in time. The real problems in Palestine has to do with the extremist militants having too much of a say compared to political authorities. Some would also call the firing of rockets from Hamas since their military coup in 2007 for state terror. The palestinean authorities in Gaza have been somewhere between inept and willfully disobedient at curtailing extremism. The lack of trust in them as a guarantee against attacks on Israel is what is killing most hope for a solution. https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/news/middle-east/13436-israel-wants-a-truce-that-does-not-include-a-halt-on-assassinationsMossad + IDF's publicly disclosed assassinations alone can be given as a reason for Hamas's ineptitude. Furthermore, the lack of leadership that Israel has fostered in Gaza does not explain why they grip tighter and tighter onto the throat of the far more cooperative west bank. This mainly provides evidence that Israel wants to do to the west bank what it did to gaza; Gaza has been a tremendous success. If they were smart enough to cut down the majority of the civilian casualties in Gaza by making a more pyrrhic ground invasion, they could literally keep the palestinians locked up until a major military power develops in the middle east. Unfortunately, the far right politicians are inept and they're stupid enough to throw away international support to maintain a Russian level of propaganda control over their citizens. In this sense, the west bank and gaza barriers are by far the least important in isolating the Israeli public from sympathizing with the Palestinians. The average Israeli thinks that Palestinians are basically sore losers. As you may have seen in this thread, they are not alone, with many here saying that Israel "won" that land. Sadly, Israel has not yet learned that conquerors have a responsibility to protect the people of the lands that they conquer, and it's terrifying that Israel has instead chosen an ethnic cleansing because I fear that Israel may one day reap what it has sown. Netanyahu is looking at Hamas as exclusively a terror organisation and has thus far refused to even accept their legitimacy as a negotiation partner. It is part of the reason things are so screwed up in the negotiations. But when it comes down to it, Hamas has not delivered much more than rockets and attack tunnels they can use for crimes against Israel. They are no saints either. When it comes to the West Bank, there is no denying that Israel is abusing them royally, through the expansion of the Allon plan with extention of area C and therefore annexation of more of the most important part of the West Bank. That is the real definition of the extreme right wing in Israel. The more liberal side is more pragmatic in negotiations, while the extreme right wants more and more concessions without giving anything to the palestinians. The political extremism is absolutely two-sided between Hamas and Israel. Israel has elected a government of ultra-extremists with no tolerance for palestinians. Gaza has elected a government with extremists with no tolerance for Israelis. Both use a certain level of one-sidedness of information to ensure domestic support for their actions. Problem is that while Gaza is a militarist on militarist, the West bank is pragmatist on militarist. Abusing the West Bank for something happening in Gaza is part of why things are so difficult to deescalate.
In regards to the last sentence, the reverse is the current situation. The entire operation in Gaza was mainly justified (in terms of gaining popular support) by a media frenzy over the death of 3 teens in the West Bank.
But yeah I largely agree with pretty much all your other points, except for referring to Hamas as a government. I would point to the extremity in Gaza as being more of a result of media isolation similar to that of Israel.
|
On August 18 2014 08:05 Xiphos wrote:
But I'm hoping for both to actually sit down and talk about the situation rather than letting their religion ideology cloud over their judgement.
Yeah, this really isn't about religion. Persecuted nation sets up shop in new territory, encounters resistance from locals. Sure, they differ in religion, and this sometimes gets roped into the rhetoric, but you might as well say the American/Indian conflict was about religion. It was racial, colonial, religious, yes, but mostly it was about land and resources.
|
On August 18 2014 11:01 Yoav wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2014 08:05 Xiphos wrote:
But I'm hoping for both to actually sit down and talk about the situation rather than letting their religion ideology cloud over their judgement. Yeah, this really isn't about religion. Persecuted nation sets up shop in new territory, encounters resistance from locals. Sure, they differ in religion, and this sometimes gets roped into the rhetoric, but you might as well say the American/Indian conflict was about religion. It was racial, colonial, religious, yes, but mostly it was about land and resources.
But it is about religion. The biblical account mentioned that the Jews are untitled to a "promise land" around where the city of Jerusalem is located and that's why the UN instated the persecuted nation there in the first place. So Israel took the local people's land due to religion and they don't want to negotiate without bias due to being "God's chosen people."
|
On August 18 2014 11:14 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2014 11:01 Yoav wrote:On August 18 2014 08:05 Xiphos wrote:
But I'm hoping for both to actually sit down and talk about the situation rather than letting their religion ideology cloud over their judgement. Yeah, this really isn't about religion. Persecuted nation sets up shop in new territory, encounters resistance from locals. Sure, they differ in religion, and this sometimes gets roped into the rhetoric, but you might as well say the American/Indian conflict was about religion. It was racial, colonial, religious, yes, but mostly it was about land and resources. But it is about religion. The biblical account mentioned that the Jews are untitled to a "promise land" around where the city of Jerusalem is located and that's why the UN instated the persecuted nation there in the first place. So Israel took the local people's land due to religion and they don't want to negotiate without bias due to being "God's chosen people."
Fun fact, most of the original Zionists were secular/atheist whose motivation was not religion. Look at Theodor Herzl for example.
Here are the two main reasons for the rise of Zionism
1. They concluded that Jews would never be accepted in Eastern Europe due to the pogroms and it is necessary for the Jewish people to have their own homeland where they can live safely.
2. The Jews in many Western European countries were integrating so well, that many of the Zionists were worried that their identity would be lost. However, even with the successful integration, it did not prevent events such as the Dreyfus Affair from happening which strengthened Zionism.
|
On August 18 2014 11:14 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2014 11:01 Yoav wrote:On August 18 2014 08:05 Xiphos wrote:
But I'm hoping for both to actually sit down and talk about the situation rather than letting their religion ideology cloud over their judgement. Yeah, this really isn't about religion. Persecuted nation sets up shop in new territory, encounters resistance from locals. Sure, they differ in religion, and this sometimes gets roped into the rhetoric, but you might as well say the American/Indian conflict was about religion. It was racial, colonial, religious, yes, but mostly it was about land and resources. But it is about religion. The biblical account mentioned that the Jews are untitled to a "promise land" around where the city of Jerusalem is located and that's why the UN instated the persecuted nation there in the first place. So Israel took the local people's land due to religion and they don't want to negotiate without bias due to being "God's chosen people."
No, the conflict is about land. Religion is often used to rally the masses on either side, but the main political considerations are land and power.
On August 18 2014 11:21 Shiragaku wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2014 11:14 Xiphos wrote:On August 18 2014 11:01 Yoav wrote:On August 18 2014 08:05 Xiphos wrote:
But I'm hoping for both to actually sit down and talk about the situation rather than letting their religion ideology cloud over their judgement. Yeah, this really isn't about religion. Persecuted nation sets up shop in new territory, encounters resistance from locals. Sure, they differ in religion, and this sometimes gets roped into the rhetoric, but you might as well say the American/Indian conflict was about religion. It was racial, colonial, religious, yes, but mostly it was about land and resources. But it is about religion. The biblical account mentioned that the Jews are untitled to a "promise land" around where the city of Jerusalem is located and that's why the UN instated the persecuted nation there in the first place. So Israel took the local people's land due to religion and they don't want to negotiate without bias due to being "God's chosen people." Fun fact, most of the original Zionists were secular/atheist whose motivation was not religion. Look at Theodor Herzl for example. Here are the two main reasons for the rise of Zionism 1. They concluded that Jews would never be accepted in Eastern Europe due to the pogroms and it is necessary for the Jewish people to have their own homeland where they can live safely. 2. The Jews in many Western European countries were integrating so well, that many of the Zionists were worried that their identity would be lost. However, even with the successful integration, it did not prevent events such as the Dreyfus Affair from happening which strengthened Zionism.
I would add that the current resurgence of is mainly coming from the right (which by american standards would be far-right a la tea party) which gains almost unanimous support whenever the IDF is involved.
|
It seems the negotiations have stalled.
reuters
Meanwhile, in Hebron (West Bank), 2 houses of suspects for the murder of the 3 teenagers were demolished by Israeli soldiers and the third suspects house has been sealed with cement. It happened after the israeli supreme court rejected appeals and the soldiers doing it were avoiding casualties. During the demolition they were getting attacked with stones and molotov cocktails. The demolition is "a message" to the palestineans and meant as a "deterrent".
al jazeera
2 days ago a peace-demonstration in Tel-Aviv had thousands of attendées, the largest crowd yet.
jpost
An anti-ceasefire demonstration in Tel-Aviv had 4 days ago gathered thousands from the southern parts of Israel.
reuters
|
Israel has been refusing to allow employees of Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch to enter the Gaza Strip in order to conduct their own independent investigations into the fighting, using various bureaucratic excuses.
Both human rights organizations have been trying to obtain permission from the Civil Administration to enter Gaza since July 7. Two different reasons have been cited for the refusals: The first is that the Erez border crossing between Israel and the Gaza Strip is closed and no entry permits are being granted until further notice; the second is neither group is registered with the Social Affairs Ministry as a humanitarian aid organization.
Source
|
|
|
It seems to be somewhat justified to say that Israel isn't ready to negotiate. It seems that after the anti-ceasefire demonstrations Netanyahu has found some more targets for bombings and the never give up, never surrender came back.
To the detriment of Hamas a report of Fatah officials getting shot in the legs for leaving their house by masked men presumably from Hamas.
ABC news
|
Before his foot even touches Gaza’s ground, the Canadian human rights scholar recently appointed to head the United Nations’ inquiry into the latest war there has come under withering preemptive attack. Israeli officials and their American supporters have compared the choice of William Schabas to chair the Gaza inquiry commission to “inviting ISIS to organize religious tolerance week” — a reference to the violent, fundamentalist Islamic group whose mass murders in Syria and Iraq have won it infamy. Full-page ads in The New York Times and The Washington Post called Schabas “an apologist for radical anti-Semites.” This barrage shouldn’t have surprised Schabas, the son of a prominent Canadian Jewish musician, who fondly recalls visits to synagogues and family meals at Jewish delicatessens. He may — as he has noted — visit Israel frequently, actively oppose an economic boycott of the Jewish state and sit on the board of The Israel Law Review and on the advisory board of a London-based Jewish human rights group. But the scholar has never made a secret of his views of the Israeli government’s policies and of its prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. Schabas has, among other things, publicly described the Israeli leader as “the greatest threat to the survival of Israel.” Read more: http://forward.com/articles/204374/why-israels-fight-against-william-schabas-may-be-o/#ixzz3AyNHDJNq
Pretty good article about the guy UN Watch claims is an antisemite.
+ Show Spoiler +It's almost as if the UN isn't Nazis, and UN Watch is, due to its origins and ownership, a branch of the Israeli pro-military hasbara machine.
|
Hamas has broken several ceasefires lol, it wasn't just because of rockets before this one ended. This is several ceasefire breakages in the making here.
EDIT: I think this thread suffers from the same thing posted here nearly 50 pages ago. The change in the way social media displays information and the way that warps the situation, on both sides of it, polarizing it more, not less is definitely at play here.
|
On August 21 2014 10:33 docvoc wrote:Hamas has broken several ceasefires lol, it wasn't just because of rockets before this one ended. This is several ceasefire breakages in the making here. EDIT: I think this thread suffers from the same thing posted here nearly 50 pages ago. The change in the way social media displays information and the way that warps the situation, on both sides of it, polarizing it more, not less is definitely at play here.
Hamas broke the ceasefire many time, and they explained why every time. They use it like a leverage, because they want to be free from the blockade and Israel colonialisation, which is the core of the problem. The sad part is that, without the bombing from Hamas, nobody would talk about the fate of palestinians.
|
Israel2209 Posts
Guys, you're doing it wrong. It just isn't time yet, there are no anti-Israeli headlines to link to right now.
The current state of affairs is that Hamas fired 168 rockets yesterday (a record number), and countless rockets today, but more importantly:
There are no news reports of Hamas "civilian" deaths.
So just ignore this subject as you normally would when Hamas is the only one being aggressive, and continue once again when you can find news that put Israel in a bad light.
P.S. http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/In-first-Hamas-official-takes-credit-for-kidnap-and-murder-of-Israeli-teens-371703
But you already know this because you follow the subject so closely. It just isn't "link on TL" worthy because it takes away from Hamas' "freedom fighters" aura.
|
Norway28701 Posts
|
On August 21 2014 20:14 Liquid`Drone wrote:I'll just avoid making a page-long post again and link an opinion piece which does a better job, and with significantly more weight, than I ever could. http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/1.610687
This is an awesome article. I really hope this guy manages to persuade someenough people.
|
On August 21 2014 18:59 Noam wrote:Guys, you're doing it wrong. It just isn't time yet, there are no anti-Israeli headlines to link to right now. The current state of affairs is that Hamas fired 168 rockets yesterday (a record number), and countless rockets today, but more importantly: There are no news reports of Hamas "civilian" deaths.So just ignore this subject as you normally would when Hamas is the only one being aggressive, and continue once again when you can find news that put Israel in a bad light. P.S. http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/In-first-Hamas-official-takes-credit-for-kidnap-and-murder-of-Israeli-teens-371703But you already know this because you follow the subject so closely. It just isn't "link on TL" worthy because it takes away from Hamas' "freedom fighters" aura.
So, how many Israeli people died? How Israeli lost their houses, how many are living without current? There is maybe one person in this thread actually believing that Hamas are freedom fighters. The rest of us condems the actions of Hamas to the same degree as we are condemning the actions of the Israeli forces.
Just get in your head that what your side does might be in actual self defense, but so dispropriate and counter productive to the longterm stability of the region that you could aswell just bomb yourself and be done with it. And also get in your head that being against the actions of the Israeli government and army does not equal being pro Hamas and rocket attacks.
|
The article is terrible. Its gotten worse for the Palestinians because the other countries in the regions keep choseing war over peace. Isreal hasn't decided to start numerous wars against its neighbors. the violent upriseing by the palestines is why they are locked behind stone walls. Isreal isn't the one that has always opening called for the abject slaughter of all palestinians. Isreal is the one thats trying to lower civilian casualties while hamas is the one trying to increase it.
You can't look at a conflict that has gone for thousands of years based on what you see in the past few months. Gaza and south africa couldn't be any more different.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
