Surprisingly if you substitute Jewish for Muslim this is pretty similar to the founding charter of Likud. The difference is whilst Hammas have moved on and now recognise that the right of existence for a Jewish homeland, Likud still denies the right of Palestinians to their own state. On this Hammas is actually more liberal than Likud, and the Likud are not the most extremist party in the Israeli government.
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
General Israel/Palestine discussion thread - Part 4
- Thread starter theprestige
- Start date
Surprisingly if you substitute Jewish for Muslim this is pretty similar to the founding charter of Likud. The difference is whilst Hammas have moved on and now recognise that the right of existence for a Jewish homeland, Likud still denies the right of Palestinians to their own state. On this Hammas is actually more liberal than Likud, and the Likud are not the most extremist party in the Israeli government.
That is to say the Palestinian population of Gaza and the West Bank will be driven out of greater Israel and into Egypt where they will live under the authority of the IDF.
Equally Likud and consequentially the Israeli government will not negotiate to recognise a two state solution, they are committed to a Jewish state from the sea to the river,
Hercules56
Banned
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2013
- Messages
- 17,176
Its true. "From the River to the Sea", is as much an Israeli slogan as it is Palestinian.
People often make the mistake of thinking of Israel as some sort of Western democracy outpost in the middle east, it is not.
Israel executes Palestinian prisoners without trial, by beating the to death.
Israel tortures prisoners. Shin Bet routinely sexually assaults female detainees as a method of stressing them. On occasions they are raped and the rapes are recorded with the threat that if the detainees failt to co-operate the videos will be released.
Israel assassinates those it perceives as a danger to Israel. Not just active combatants as the US does, but civilian scientistst and engineers who have never threatened an Israeli. Israel has instituted an assassination policy for those involved inthe 07/10 massacre, they won't be tried, they won't be able to say this is a case of mistaken identity. There is a myth about Israeli assassinations, that they deliver justice, but most of those killed after the Munich massacre had no part in the Munich massacre many of those involved were not assassinated.
The biggest problem is that Israel's reliance on the security services, on targetted assassination, on military might means that they think they do not have to acheive a long term political solution. Short term governments always seek a short term tactical solution, which violence can deliver. But not the long term solution that politicians need to deliver, that needs compromise. Likud and the current Israeli government are committed not to participate in a two state solution, there is no-one that Hammas or the PA can negotiate with.
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
Why can't you have it both ways? That's pretty much Ukraine's position on Moscow: It's a terrorist government that can't be negotiated with, only resisted. I'm sure Ukraine would be more than pleased if they were in a position to eliminate the Oligarchy outright, instead of being forced to fight its conscripts on their own soil.
This isn't even really such a catch-22 as you imagine. Hamas's leaders - either the ones hiding in Qatar or the ones on the ground in Gaza - could renounce the organization, repudiate its tenets, and approach the Israelis (probably through an intermediary broker) to start some sort of peace process. Obviously there would have to be a substantive and convincing show of good faith. But if the dissenting leaders delivered the hardliners' heads on a platter, I'm sure the Israelis would be willing to consider a cease-fire and peace talks.
Remember Likud is committed to a greater Israel and does not recognise the right of existence of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and / or Gaza. Hamas has officially recognised the right of a Jewish homeland / Israel to exist. Hamas have abandoned the determination to destroy Israel, the barrier is on the Israeli side, not on the Palestinian side.
No they can't because Likud (not the most right wing element in the Israeli government), is not prepared to recognise the right to existence of a Palestinian state, whilst the PA and Hamas do recognise the right of existence of a Jewish homeland / Israel
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2016
- Messages
- 32,988
you got this wrong, obviously so.
Ukraine never claimed that Russia doesn't have a government representing it.
Only the war is deemed unlawful, as most non-Russian scholars agree.
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2003
- Messages
- 64,375
Uh.... no they don't. Hamas is pretty clear about that.
It is worth reading this article on how residents of the West Bank are treated =locked up at home except for one hour in the morning and evening three days a week. Running out of food and water. Punished for actions they had nothing to do with.
https://www.btselem.org/hebron/2023...t_month_in_form_of_collective_punishment#full
What incentive is their for Palestinians to think a co-operative approach such as the PA takes is any better than resistance as exemplified by Hamas. If Israel really wanted a co-operative approach with the PA it would be rewarding the residents of the West Bank.
https://www.btselem.org/hebron/2023...t_month_in_form_of_collective_punishment#full
What incentive is their for Palestinians to think a co-operative approach such as the PA takes is any better than resistance as exemplified by Hamas. If Israel really wanted a co-operative approach with the PA it would be rewarding the residents of the West Bank.
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2003
- Messages
- 64,375
For starters, they won't be used as human shields if they don't pursue the Hamas path. Seems like a pretty obvious advantage to me.
Utter nonsense.
This. This is why I'm tuning out and ignoring any cherry picked criticisms of Israel that don't apply to Hamas, "Palestine" and the entire rest of the Muslim world times 1,000 which is exactly none provided you haven't drank the Kool Aid about a lost Palestinian Motherland that doesn't exist and nobody cared about prior to the 1946.
This whole discussion is just coffee shop liberals playing their own version of the stupid Conservative Troll "Side A is openly evil but Side B is imperfect so that makes them worse" nonsense just with much bigger stakes.
Last edited:
Hamas statement of principles 2017
.
'Along the lines of 4th June 1967' implicitly accepts the existence of Israel. Thay are stating they are able to accept this as part of a negotiated settlement.
Unless you're squatting in the Olduvai Gorge with a 23&Me print out the traces your lineage directly back to Lucy what person living anywhere has the kind of "right" to a piece of land being hairsplit here?
I'm going to hazard a guess that the number of people alive today actually living in some place with a direct lineage to some far ancient ancestor in any open and honest sense of the term is not that many. As I've asked many times and gotten no answer what country WOULD be "valid" country under this line of discourse.
The country of Iraq is exactly as old as the Polaroid Camera, the Parking Meter, and the Radio Telescope, and nobody is questioning Iraq's right to exist over it.
Humanity has been breaking for the horizon to see what's over the next hill literally since before we were human and we've migrated/been displaced constantly since then. Using "Okay but did a goat herder with your DNA live on this exact spot a bajillion years ago?" as some moral/legal/international diplomacy standard now seem weird at best.
And again are we talking Israel and Palestine as modern city-states or as ancient tribal homelands? These are not the same thing.
Yes again so nobody (at)s me yes it's absurd in 2023 that a country with the stated reason for existence is to serve as a homeland for a specific religious group is absurd and Israel's continuing existence (in the sense of how it's organized as a nation-state politically and diplomatically not in the "wipe it off the face of the Earth" sense) DOES not to be predicated on it dropping that part of its identity but like all criticisms of Israel that applies to a lot of Muslims countries even more.
If Saudi Arabia gets to have Mecca, a place that literally bans non-Muslims from existing inside it, Israel can be a "Jewish Country" where only 3/4s of the population is actually Jewish. Israe; is only about 10% more Jewish then American is Christian.
I'm going to hazard a guess that the number of people alive today actually living in some place with a direct lineage to some far ancient ancestor in any open and honest sense of the term is not that many. As I've asked many times and gotten no answer what country WOULD be "valid" country under this line of discourse.
The country of Iraq is exactly as old as the Polaroid Camera, the Parking Meter, and the Radio Telescope, and nobody is questioning Iraq's right to exist over it.
Humanity has been breaking for the horizon to see what's over the next hill literally since before we were human and we've migrated/been displaced constantly since then. Using "Okay but did a goat herder with your DNA live on this exact spot a bajillion years ago?" as some moral/legal/international diplomacy standard now seem weird at best.
And again are we talking Israel and Palestine as modern city-states or as ancient tribal homelands? These are not the same thing.
Yes again so nobody (at)s me yes it's absurd in 2023 that a country with the stated reason for existence is to serve as a homeland for a specific religious group is absurd and Israel's continuing existence (in the sense of how it's organized as a nation-state politically and diplomatically not in the "wipe it off the face of the Earth" sense) DOES not to be predicated on it dropping that part of its identity but like all criticisms of Israel that applies to a lot of Muslims countries even more.
If Saudi Arabia gets to have Mecca, a place that literally bans non-Muslims from existing inside it, Israel can be a "Jewish Country" where only 3/4s of the population is actually Jewish. Israe; is only about 10% more Jewish then American is Christian.
Last edited:
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2003
- Messages
- 64,375
I'm not sure you remember your own claim, and you certainly don't understand how it relates to your quote from Hamas. Let me remind you:
In your quote, they explicitly reject any such right. What do you think "from the river to the sea" means? What do you think "rejection of the Zionist entity" means? They suggest they might negotiate for such an existence, but not because Israel has any right to it, only for the sake of "national consensus". In other words, they're signaling a willingness to accept less than what they want. But they're quite explicit in your quote that what they want is the complete destruction of Israel. Stop making excuses for them.
"The terrorist group that literally only exists because it broke away because the previous major mouthpiece for Palestine recognized Israel's right to exist and literally has 'Israel must be destroyed' in its founding document pinkie swears it's totally fine with Israel existing now."
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
Planigale et al. think we have a moral obligation to pretend Hamas is negotiating in good faith.