General Israel/Palestine discussion thread

[HoverBoarder]

And than there's the question of why Islamic Jihad started launching so many attacks against Israel after such a long truce.

A strange change in behavior that also could explain why the latest conflict in Gaza started in the first place, why so many rockets have been launched, and why people have died in the latest conflict:

Arab paper: Syria, Iran instigated Gaza conflict


Asharq Alawsat editor claims Syria, Iran caused escalation between Israel, Gaza to aid Assad regime

Careful now. Talk like this hasn't been approved by the I Hate Israel festival.

It's somewhat ironic how much effort has been put into building up the Israeli super villain narrative, and how little effort has been put into discussing why there is a current or larger conflict in the first place.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

Fascinating. How about you, y'know, add some facts?

I'm tempted to think his comment was in reference to how he and his ilk dodges pretty much all serious questions and points in threads such as this one. As in, "wow, man, you haven't learned from my history? I don't do evidence, dude".

 

[JihadJane]

A couple of sober and amusing looks at the military reality of the situation:

'THE WAR NERD: LUCIAN TRUSCOTT IV IS FOUR TIMES AS STUPID AS ISRAEL, AND ISRAEL IS PRETTY *********** STUPID'

Why kill al Jabari when you’re about to negotiate a truce with his group? The simplest answer is: you don’t want a truce. And it may be that simple: Israel wants Gaza as a punching bag, a way to show off its military power. Israel has two mini-states on its borders: Hezbollah in the North and Hamas in Gaza. And it can’t work out so easily on Hezbollah because Hezbollah defeated the IDF easily when Israel tried to move on it in 2006.

'GAZA: NO WAY. JUST. PLAIN. NOPE.'

What’s going on in Gaza is war, but not the kind any commander from the past would understand. On paper, Israel should be winning easily, because they’ve got the weapons, the numbers, the organization. The weapons Hamas is firing into Israel are primitive things, unguided rocket artillery, the kind that couldn’t hit the ground if it wasn’t for the law of gravity. On the other side, the Israelis get the best weaponry the US can give them.

But it’s not that simple. Israel may win this battle, but it’s lost the war already. You see that in the confusion the IDF shows about what to do. They’ve tried stomping hard on Gaza. In late 2008 through early 2009, “Operation Cast Lead” sent IDF troops and planes smashing into this tiny overpopulated slum. They killed 1400 Palestinians, and it didn’t do much but make everybody sick to their stomachs — including even some Israelis, once they got over their initial gloating.

 

[HoverBoarder]

Your solution is to have Palestinians not defend themselves against ethnic cleansing. Why do you think this is a desirable solution?

Working towards mutual recognition and coexistence instead of including the complete removal of all people of the Jewish race from Israel in their constitution would be a good move.

If Hamas wanted peace, they could have it at any time.


They purposefully store and launch weapons at Israeli homes and civilians in order to either kill Israeli citizens to use for political propaganda purposes, or to use the Palestinian deaths that result from retaliatory strikes on their military installations in/under civilian homes for political propaganda purposes.

 

[bikerdruid]

If Hamas wanted peace, they could have it at any time.

only with total capitulation to israel.
netanyahoo is not willing to deal in good faith.

israel's continued bombardment of gaza is inhuman.
the israeli death toll (3) has not changed in days, but palestinians continue to die. (100-200)
this is not a reasonable situation.

CBC news was interviewing israelis yesterday.
they were not complaining about being in danger, but they were being denied sleep with all the noise.
'sleep deprivation' is not reasonable reason for war.
israelis are not sleeping, and palestinian men, women and children are dying.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Biker, I asked how Israel started it and you showed me some maps. Now, I THINK I know what you were trying to get at with them but to make absolutely sure I understand your argument could you summarise the formation of Israel in your own words for me?

 

[bikerdruid]

Biker, I asked how Israel started it and you showed me some maps. Now, I THINK I know what you were trying to get at with them but to make absolutely sure I understand your argument could you summarise the formation of Israel in your own words for me?

no.
it is not the topic.
the maps clearly showed much of the problem.
wtf? are you being deliberately obtuse.
right now, i am concerned with the renewed war with gaza.
palestinian kids are dying.
no israelis are dying.
no one should should be dying.
is this difficult for you?

 

[bigjelmapro]

An in-depth analysis of international law in relation to "Operation" "Pillar of Defence":

Debunking Israel’s Justification: Why Pillar of Defence breaches International Law.

Baskin was never involved with peace talks. There's several articles I've read elsewhere (ie: Gaza: Assassinated Hamas Leader Ahmed Jabari ‘Was Canvassing’ Truce Agreement with Israel) that claimed that this peace activist somehow played a 'crucial role'. These claims that there was a permanent truce draft in the works hours before Jabari's killing are unfounded thus far.

Hamas has been claiming responsibility for missile/mortar attacks for months before this 'Pillar of Defence'. How can one be in talks and fire missiles/mortars into Israel at the same time? Additional claims of intentionally shooting missiles into open areas are also contradicted by schools and other residential areas being hit and Hamas claims of responsibility.

 

[Ziggurat]

israel's continued bombardment of gaza is inhuman.
the israeli death toll (3) has not changed in days, but palestinians continue to die. (100-200)
this is not a reasonable situation.

In other words, everything would be better if only some more Jews would die.

Hamas is trying to kill as many Jews as they can. They deserve retaliation with deadly force. Israel shouldn't have to wait until more Jews die in order to defend itself

 

[DreadNiK]

no.
it is not the topic.
the maps clearly showed much of the problem.
wtf? are you being deliberately obtuse.
right now, i am concerned with the renewed war with gaza.
palestinian kids are dying.
no israelis are dying.
no one should should be dying.
is this difficult for you?

this is the problem i have with the (for want of a better term) 'pro-Palestinian side' - it is easy to take the position 'I don't want children/women/civilians to be killed' and act as if anyone who disagrees with your position as whole, to be someone who does want or doesn't care if this happens.

I have no reason to be biased on either side here (that I'm aware of), I have no Israeli/Jewish friends and I have no Muslim/Arab/Palestinian friends, I hate all religion, and the violence has no effect on my life...but I take, for want of a better term, 'the pro-Israel side' based on the evidence and arguments I have seen.

You do realise the 'pro-Israel side' are generally also pretty against the killing of children/women/civilians, but not to the point where every other concern is sidelined?

And you also realise that it is Hamas and the Palestinians who appear to have the most disregard for civilian lives, both Israeli and their own (which is even more sickening and cynical?). I'm still waiting to hear Palestinians or their supporters condemn some of the practices of their 'side' such as teaching their children that martyring yourself by killing innocents is glorious, rather than reprehensible.

ETA: also, you can't post maps to support your argument then when someone asks for clarification/elaboration say 'no, that isn't the topic'...you were the one who brought it up ffs. Well, actually, clearly you can, but it is intellectually dishonest

 

[JihadJane]

'Yes! The New Yorker publishes Munayyer’s call for ‘representative and democratic single state’'

However wrong Rupert Murdoch was about the Jewish media in his infamous tweet last weekend, he's right about The New Yorker. The magazine is owned by Jews, the Newhouse family, and many of its writers and readers are Jewish, and its editor David Remnick, the Princeton-educated son of a New Jersey dentist who is said to reflect the views of the Upper West Side, has made a point of writing a lot of the articles about Israel himself. ...

In recent years, though, maybe burned by his neoconservative expedition, Remnick has shown depth and thoughtfulness about the conflict. He has turned with anger against the occupation and said bluntly that the American Jewish community is tired of holding the bag. So it is a glorious thing that last night Remnick published a piece by Yousef Munayyer that brings the great new truths of the Israel/Palestine conflict to an elite American readership: Zionism failed in its execution, the Israeli policy of bludgeoning Palestinians will never work, and the two peoples live in one state and must learn how to live together democratically. Yesterday I said that this war has cooked Israel's goose in the American conventional wisdom, and has pushed the divorce between American Jews and Israeli Jews; and this piece is further proof. So let's celebrate the New Yorker!

[My bold -JJ]

 

[JihadJane]

this is the problem i have with the (for want of a better term) 'pro-Palestinian side' - it is easy to take the position 'I don't want children/women/civilians to be killed' and act as if anyone who disagrees with your position as whole, to be someone who does want or doesn't care if this happens.

I have no reason to be biased on either side here (that I'm aware of), I have no Israeli/Jewish friends and I have no Muslim/Arab/Palestinian friends, I hate all religion, and the violence has no effect on my life...but I take, for want of a better term, 'the pro-Israel side' based on the evidence and arguments I have seen.

You do realise the 'pro-Israel side' are generally also pretty against the killing of children/women/civilians, but not to the point where every other concern is sidelined?

And you also realise that it is Hamas and the Palestinians who appear to have the most disregard for civilian lives, both Israeli and their own (which is even more sickening and cynical?). I'm still waiting to hear Palestinians or their supporters condemn some of the practices of their 'side' such as teaching their children that martyring yourself by killing innocents is glorious, rather than reprehensible.

ETA: also, you can't post maps to support your argument then when someone asks for clarification/elaboration say 'no, that isn't the topic'...you were the one who brought it up ffs. Well, actually, clearly you can, but it is intellectually dishonest

The author of an article I linked to, above, suggests that, after decades of living under siege, in a crowded prison slum, Palestinians see one dead Israeli to 30 dead Arabs as worth the effort.

So Gaza is going to get more and more crowded, more and more angry, more and more willing to take 30 casualties for the chance to inflict just one on the Israelis. That’s about the rate it’s running now, 30 Arab casualties for every Israeli casualty—and you need to realize, that might be absolutely OK with the people in Gaza.

 

[IDB87]

Name six of "these people".



[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/2638950aa188de303b.jpg[/qimg]

That map makes no mention of Jordanian or Egyptian occupation.

Why?

 

[IDB87]

The author of an article I linked to, above, suggests that, after decades of living under siege, in a crowded prison slum, Palestinians see one dead Israeli to 30 dead Arabs as worth the effort.

Those loses cannot be sustained. Perhaps they should reconsider their tactics? Unless Hamas wishes to go the way of the Tamil Tigers.

Also, it reinforces the idea that Hamas simply wishes to kill Jews, no matter the cost or the outcome.

 

[Ziggurat]

'Yes! The New Yorker publishes Munayyer’s call for ‘representative and democratic single state’'

I totally agree. A one-state solution is the only solution.

 

[Virus]

'Yes! The New Yorker publishes Munayyer’s call for ‘representative and democratic single state’'
[My bold -JJ]

Out of all the pipe-dream "solutions", the one-state solution is the stupidest of all.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

no.
it is not the topic.

Yeah, it is. The topic is general discussion of Israel/Palestine. It would help me get a handle on what you think the problems boil down to. I don't understand why you don't just summarise your take on it, even in a PM if you prefer.

the maps clearly showed much of the problem.

Clearly they do not to me. Again, I think I can see what you're going for, but without any comment, particularly on what you think happened at the formation of Israel. I'm sorry if that seems arduous to you, but I think it's a reasonable request.

wtf? are you being deliberately obtuse.

No.

right now, i am concerned with the renewed war with gaza.
palestinian kids are dying.

Yes. It's a shame the Palestinian militants fire their rockets from civilian centres isn't it?

no israelis are dying.

Well that's simply not true at all:
Mirah Scharf, Aharon Smadja, Itzik Amsalem, all killed on the 15th of this month in a rocket attack.

Further to this, Humanitarian Aid trucks, allowed through the Kerem Shalom crossing by Israel into Gaza were rocketed TODAY. No casualties reported as of yet, but they're firing on Humanitarian Aid. Trucks full of food and medical supplies.

no one should should be dying.
is this difficult for you?

I agree. I did however ask how Israel started it and you showed me some maps that didn't explain anything.

 

[Virus]

That map makes no mention of Jordanian or Egyptian occupation.

Why?

It makes no mention of anything. It makes no mention that it was all British in the first slide. It makes no mention that the Palestinians rejected the proposal in the second slide and that the Arabs started the war that led to the third.

It's classic agitprop. You can make anything look like anything if you omit context.

 

[portlandatheist]

More Palestinian casualties:
http://www.cnn.com/video/?hpt=hp_t1#/video/world/2012/11/20/seg-gaza-collaborator.cnn

 

[IDB87]

It makes no mention of anything. It makes no mention that it was all British in the first slide. It makes no mention that the Palestinians rejected the proposal in the second slide and that the Arabs started the war that led to the third.

It's classic agitprop. You can make anything look like anything if you omit context.

I was more hoping JJ would admit that, but I guess I'm still optimistic.