General Israel/Palestine discussion thread

[The Fool]

Read. Nobody has said that Israel would never accept a UN presence. So feel free to provide evidence that someone has, or retract. I would suggest you do one of those two things before you start whining again about people misrepresenting your positions.

here is the first I found
So go ahead. Detail your proposed plan of action for your UN "peacekeepers" when the Knesset and the Prime Minister say "hell no" and mobilize the IDF.

and another one
How are the UN troops going to enter the West Bank without Israel's permission?

and another one
How good they are as everything to do with whether Israel gives permission. And I don;t see that happening, since Israel has already seen how Hezbollah arms itself under the noses of an impotent UN and has no desire for Hamas to do the same.




sometimes you deny things and I wonder what you are reading? It doesn't appear to be the same forum I am reading...

 

[Virus]

Who's going to donate troops to this UN occupation of Gaza? I think most countries won't touch it with a ten foot pole.

The reaction from the leftists and Truthers would be funny though.

 

[The Fool]

You are delusional if you think the UN is going to occupy Gaza.

thats nice......any comment on the question?

 

[WildCat]

thats nice......any comment on the question?

You mean your delusional fantasy whereby UN troops invade Gaza?

 

[The Fool]

Who's going to donate troops to this UN occupation of Gaza? I think most countries won't touch it with a ten foot pole.

The reaction from the leftists and Truthers would be funny though.

argument from incredulity.

 

[The Fool]

You mean your delusional fantasy whereby UN troops invade Gaza?

Is that the new chant? will it replace the one where I want Israel to Nuke itself? Did the UN invade lebanon? you seem to think that UN presence = invasion.

once again...any comment on the question?

 

[Virus]

What are the troops on the border meant to be solving?

 

[The Fool]

What are the troops on the border meant to be solving?

can you give us a hint? what troops? what border?

 

[a_unique_person]

You weren't claiming that Self Determination is a right. Just like nobody is denying that Self Determination is a right.

You were claiming that you could demonstrate specific instances of demands for self-determination, by specific people groups, during specific historical periods. You've been asked to support that claim with evidence. Telling us that Self Determination is a right is not evidence that people have been demanding it.

Asserting that right at the wrong time can be a disaster, just ask the Armenians.

 

[mortimer]

here is the first I found
So go ahead. Detail your proposed plan of action for your UN "peacekeepers" when the Knesset and the Prime Minister say "hell no" and mobilize the IDF.

and another one
How are the UN troops going to enter the West Bank without Israel's permission?

and another one
How good they are as everything to do with whether Israel gives permission. And I don;t see that happening, since Israel has already seen how Hezbollah arms itself under the noses of an impotent UN and has no desire for Hamas to do the same.

None of those quotes say what you claim they say.

 

[WildCat]

Is that the new chant? will it replace the one where I want Israel to Nuke itself? Did the UN invade lebanon? you seem to think that UN presence = invasion.

once again...any comment on the question?

Why need I comment on your question? You may as well ask what Israel will do if space aliens occupy Gaza.

The UN will not do anything not agreed to by Israel and the PA.

 

[IDB87]

You may as well ask what Israel will do if space aliens occupy Gaza.

...

But what WILL Israel do if space aliens occupy Gaza?

 

[a_unique_person]

You weren't claiming that Self Determination is a right. Just like nobody is denying that Self Determination is a right.

You were claiming that you could demonstrate specific instances of demands for self-determination, by specific people groups, during specific historical periods. You've been asked to support that claim with evidence. Telling us that Self Determination is a right is not evidence that people have been demanding it.

It seems to be incredibly important to assert that the Palestinians asserted no desire for self determination under the Ottoman Empire. I am guessing this is so it can be stated that their current desire for self determination is really nothing more than anti-semitism. Correct me if I am wrong.

 

[theprestige]

Asserting that right at the wrong time can be a disaster, just ask the Armenians.

Granted, and willingly granted.

But if you asked me to support my claim that I could demonstrate that the specific Armenian people group, during a specific historical period, specifically asserted their right to self-determination, I would be able to demonstrate it, and support my claim, without any trouble at all.

It seems to be incredibly important to assert that the Palestinians asserted no desire for self determination under the Ottoman Empire. I am guessing this is so it can be stated that their current desire for self determination is really nothing more than anti-semitism. Correct me if I am wrong.

You're wrong.

You claimed that you could demonstrate that a specific people group, during a specific historical period, specifically asserted their right to self determination.

You've been asked to support this claim with evidence, to demonstrate what you said you could demonstrate.

I am guessing you made the claim because a) you naively thought you could demonstrate it; and b) you hoped to win an argument by doing so. I am also guessing that a) you now realize you cannot demonstrate it; and b) faced with the prospect of losing the argument, you are attempting to pretend the argument is about something else. Correct me if I am wrong.

Or better yet, instead of playing guessing games, simply present evidence to support your claims, or withdraw your claims. Surely that's not too much to ask of a skeptic and a rational thinker?

 

[a_unique_person]

Granted, and willingly granted.

But if you asked me to support my claim that I could demonstrate that the specific Armenian people group, during a specific historical period, specifically asserted their right to self-determination, I would be able to demonstrate it, and support my claim, without any trouble at all.

There's the problem. If demonstrating a right means it ends up killing you, then maybe you are better off putting up with your conditions that dying. Slavery works on that principle, for example. You could stand up for your rights, and be killed on the spot. Did that mean those who did not stand up for their rights did not believe in their right to be free? Till the Armenians stood up for their right of self determination, did that mean they were not interested in it?

 

[Virus]

Lack of proof isn't proof. And you're still arguing that your thesis is true because it should be true.

Why did you even bother trying to start round 2 of your failed argument?

 

[a_unique_person]

Lack of proof isn't proof. And you're still arguing that your thesis is true because it should be true.

Why did you even bother trying to start round 2 of your failed argument?

Let's look at a simple logical case. There are two slaves. One asserts his right to be free, and is killed on the spot for doing so. The other slave does not. Does this mean the second slave does not believe in his right to be free.

What surprises me is that this is so contentious. I would have thought the obvious response is that human nature being what it is, people tend to want to be free, not enslaved.

 

[Virus]

Let's look at a simple logical case. There are two slaves. One asserts his right to be free, and is killed on the spot for doing so. The other slave does not. Does this mean the second slave does not believe in his right to be free.

What surprises me is that this is so contentious. I would have thought the obvious response is that human nature being what it is, people tend to want to be free, not enslaved.

"It's true because it should be true" isn't an argument.

 

[HoverBoarder]

Lack of proof isn't proof. And you're still arguing that your thesis is true because it should be true.

Why did you even bother trying to start round 2 of your failed argument?

I just don't see the point of this whole argument over self-determination. Nobody is convincing each other, and it is not helping the people who are being argued over.

Every wants to have the right of self determination, including Palestinians, but arguing over that doesn't help give them more rights than they have now.

What would help the Palestinians get more rights is discussing the reasons why they do not have them now.



The Palestinians want the rights to have those who fled during the wars to be able to come back.

They want an airport.

They want more rights to ship and import goods.

They want more freedom of movement.


Those are all very valid desires, but I just don't personally see the point of the whole historical desire for self-determination thing. Everyone wants basic rights whether it is 2000 years ago or today, but if the Palestinians actually want to get them now, than they have to be serious about working to get them.

That is not going to happen with a charter that calls for the destruction of Israel. They have to be willing to work with the Israelis if they want to get their rights and a State to call their own, and Israel needs to be willing to work with the Palestinians if they want to stop living of near perpetual war.


There are solutions to this problem, but people need to be willing to let go of their egos and pride and work with the other side.

 

[HoverBoarder]

Whatever happened to talking about actual solutions to this problem?

If you think the treatment of the Palestinians are bad, and if others think that the stated goal of Hamas and other Palestinians to destroy Israel is bad, than what should be done to improve this situation?

I think that setting up a Palestinian State that is supported by Jordan, while Israel keeps some settlements in the WB and the Golan Heights, is maybe the best option. What do you think is the best option?

It seems like the biggest impediment to the Palestinians getting a State is that Hamas and other Palestinian groups are unwilling to live next to living Jewish people.

Do you think there is anything that can be done or should be done to address this problem?

That is certainly the narrative that is being created.

So back on the issue of Israel and Palestine, if this is a narrative, it is a narrative that Hamas and other Palestinian groups are creating through their actions, statements, and charters.

If there is going to be a solution, it will have to deal with this fact.


Not that there are not things from Israel that will have to be dealt with like the settlements, access to holy sites in Jerusalem, checkpoints, etc...

But you cannot just focus on one side. The issues on both sides will have to be dealt with for a solution to work.