Senate Israel/Palestine

Discussion in 'Community' started by Obi-Wan McCartney, Jan 4, 2009.

  1. Mr44 VIP

    Member Since:
    May 21, 2002
    star 6
    If anything is unfair and we're propagating it, then it would be up to our governments to change it. Not to Palestinians.

    Watto, you're still glossing over the why. This perception that the Palestinians don't have any self determination and/or aren't capable of controlling their own path forward is the exact opposite of how the world works.

    You're absolutely correct, the Palestinians can wait around for other nations to do something instead of improving themselves. They can sit around and bemoan about how things aren't fair. About how the rest of the civilized world picks Israel's side over them. About how the UN keeps passing meaningless resolutions without actually helping the plight of the Palestinians themselves. Except that none of that is the productive way forward. All that whining and 5 Euros will get you a cup of coffee.

    If our governments wanted to, we could all change who we support. The US and the EU could lift the trade restrictions against the Palestinian ruling party tomorrow. But we aren't going to. A country like Germany can publicly condemn illegal Jewish settlements all day long, but its just lip service. The German government is still going to sell submarines to Israel that are going to be used to sink Palestinian smuggling ships, because the Palestinians don't play nice with anyone else besides say Iran, Syria, ie..the collective "bad guys...." Israel is a strong democratic and economic power in the region. The Palestinians are a great big ball of suckatude that's lead by an internationally recognized terrorist organization and has no economy to speak of. This is because they're trapped in a self destructive revenge mentality. I don't know. It's fairly obvious on which side any half-way intelligent country would hedge its bets for. At this point in time, it's more likely that the EU would start trading with Zimbabwe than the Palestinian Authority, and that says A LOT right there.

  2. SuperWatto Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Sep 19, 2000
    star 5
    My my 44, you really don't have one idealistic bone in your body, do you. But no matter; even stale voices need to be considered :p

    We sure are, it's just a question of when. And when that day comes, the mentality you display will be considered quaint by the majority. But I trust you're smart enough to change stances when the day dawns.
  3. Mr44 VIP

    Member Since:
    May 21, 2002
    star 6
    Watto, of course the day will come. But it's not going to happen in isolation. The quaint idea is that the nations in the world would somehow act in a manner that is self destructive to their own aims. It's like saying that if North Korea rejected the negative legacy of Kim Jong-il and his son Kim Jong-um, expressed a desire to reconcile with South Korea, and asked to become part of the world economy, the other nations wouldn't modify their reactions to it. It's not like the rest of the world simply decided to hate North Korea because they were bored. If those things happened, then North Korea would be flooded with new attention as an untapped market.

    The comparison here is obvious. The Palestinians are capable of such change, it's just going to come when they earn the trust for the restrictions to be lifted. But until then, they're going to be treated as the pariahs that their actions so far have earned.

    I'll even help them out. The first thing that the Palestinians have to do is accept the idea that they picked the wrong team. They have to reject the notion that they're anything more than a puppet of Iran and Syria. Both Iran and Syria couldn't give two shakes about the plight of the Palestinians, and only use them to further their own goals. Not to mention the fact that both countries have punitive international actions against them, and are really only a step away from getting the military hammer dropped on themselves. (And friends of enemies are always enemies.)

    Next, instead of continuing a desire for revenge and wasting their limited resources on trying to acquire weapons, they need to invest in a productive export. Not too long ago, the Chicago Tribune ran a story about how Israel parlayed their humus production into a hugely successful cash resource. Whereas humus used to be relatively unknown in the West, Israeli humus is now the #1 brand sold in Europe and the US. (in fact, Northwestern University had a student meeting which focused on if buying humus somehow supported Zionist goals. But ultimately, the university stayed with it) For example, Gaza produces olives, lemons, and olive oil derived products such as soap. The West Bank is a major stone and masonry center. But combined, Gaza and the West Bank still suffer from a rate of below the poverty level of 60-70% (it fluctuates depending on the area, but is still crippling), because there is no unified economic base.

    So sure, Hamas can whine and complain about how things haven't been fair since the good ole days of 1947, in order to placate the population and remain in power themselves, or they can actually do something productive. One path will bring about results. The other will ensure another 60 years go by without change.
  4. SuperWatto Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Sep 19, 2000
    star 5
    Pffft.

    Around the time of that last bus bombing, the Dutch government made funds and workers available for the construction of a port in Gaza. It was blasted to smithereens by the IDF.

    The IDF also managed to uproot no less than a million Palestinian olive trees. To make way for roads - roads more often than not restricted to Palestinians, constructed illegally, paved to confiscate land. Roads from Israel to its settlements.

    This is occupation. The things you expect from the Palestinians cannot realistically be expected from people under occupation - especially not these, after so long, so thoroughly.
  5. Mr44 VIP

    Member Since:
    May 21, 2002
    star 6
    Yeah, because much of those funds were diverted into purchasing mortar shells and rockets to attack Israel. If 2 dollars are given, spending a dollar for a port, a dollar for bombs doesn't indicate the noblest of intentions.

    It's why the Palestinians have to recapture the moral sense that was lost so long ago.
  6. KnightWriter Administrator Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Nov 6, 2001
    star 8
    I didn't, but it was an embarrassment. He lectures the President of the United States and then gets applauded repeatedly by the American Congress. As Glenn Greenwald wrote, if it was any issue other than Israel, there would be nuclear-level outrage. Because it's Israel, though, it is somehow acceptable. As a commenter on Salon wrote, he got a better reception in Congress than he would have in his own legislature back in Israel.

    Israel is on a suicidal path, and hardly anyone is trying to do something about it.
  7. LostOnHoth Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2000
    star 5
    I don't have the time to address any of the comments made by Mr44 at the moment (which are bizarre to say the least) buy I do want to point out to Vaderize03 that the reason why the UN does not issue resolutions in relation to Hamas is because neither Hamas or the Palestinian Authority for that matter are nation state members of the UN and so the UN has no jurisdiction to issue such resolutions. The PA has 'observer' status only. The UN is bound by its Charter. So it's not a conspiracy. When the sovereign state of Palestine is brought into the folds of the UN then the UN will have jurisdiction. Until then it can only 'condemn' actions which it deems to be counterproductive to achieving a peaceful resolution to the conflict.
  8. Ghost Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Oct 13, 2003
    star 6
    Really? While Netanyahu was warmly received, he actually stressed that President Obama and him were on the same page because Obama said "the 67 borders with mutually-negotiated swaps," giving Obama some political cover. And at least agreed he'd have to make some painful compromises, though he didn't name any specifics or say anything new.

    I don't agree with everything he said, but it was a good speech, seemed he wanted to "reset" relations with America. I don't think he expected his comments last week were intended for Americans, just the right-wing Israelis back home.
  9. SuperWatto Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Sep 19, 2000
    star 5
    Yes the Palestinians are really just one guy who cannot be trusted. Uh-huh!
  10. Mr44 VIP

    Member Since:
    May 21, 2002
    star 6
    LOH, Watto, we're getting into back and forth territory with the thread again, but you guys are still missing the point.

    1)Why do you suppose Germany, just this month, authorized a sale of attack submarines to Israel with the express purpose to sink Palestinian cargo ships if needed? This isn't a decades old contract that I'm suddenly bringing up to prove some sort of out-dated point. The fact is, with everything that is known, Germany is still selling the subs to Israel to aid in its defense against the Palestinians. (Does Israel even need help in this regard?) Why isn't it the other way around? This sale happened even as Hamas and other terrorist groups are on the boycott list of the EU. (except for humanitarian aid)

    2)Why did the Obama administration just give Israel 200 million dollars as a military aid bonus (above and beyond what the US already gives Israel) in order to shore up shortcomings in Israel's defense network? Obama even mentioned the leadership of the Palestinians by name as he characterized them as a threat to Israel.

    3)Why do even the legitimate Arab nation/states in the region either ignore outright, or in the case of Egypt, engage in armed conflict against the Palestinians probably harsher or as harsh as Israel itself does?

    I can point out how France still supplies Israel with Mirage fighters, and how India just agreed to a technology exchange, and all sorts of other examples. But answer the 3 questions above, and you'll get the crux of the argument over what is happening in the region. What's bizarre to me is that you guys seem to ignore all of these factors and simply default to "But it's not fair," and then basically repeat a variation of that over and over. It's not just the forum here, but out in the world, just about every single country lists the Palestinians in the the "bad guy" column because of their actions. That is except for Iran, Syria, and probably Venezuela, just to be contrary. Why do you suppose that is?

    The Palestinians are like King Victor of Italy during WWII, when Victor went along with Mussolini and hooked up with the Nazis. I'm sure Victor's last thoughts, as his reign was ending was, "we're allied with who?" The Nazis were bad, and therefore Italy was bad, even if their trains ran on time for a fleeting moment in history. (yes, obvious and intentional Mike Godwin reference here)

    Both Israel and the Palestinians are correct, and both are wrong. Both Israel and the Palestinians have valid self survival concerns, and both have engaged in over-reactions against the other. However, if the Palestinians have a larger desire or legitimate concern, it's long been lost, or at least rejected by a majority of the world, because of the path that's been taken. If they want to make progress, this has to change.
  11. SuperWatto Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Sep 19, 2000
    star 5
    Yes, of course. We've got it all wrong. When a nation occupies land, the people who live there need to change.

  12. Fire_Ice_Death Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2001
    star 7
    In 44's world, yes. That's why I've stopped responding to him.
  13. Mr44 VIP

    Member Since:
    May 21, 2002
    star 6
    Of course, neither of those responses answered the questions.

    FID, it's not my world. It's the lens that the UN, NATO, and just about every nation on the planet is currently using. I realize that you simply take the contrary position anyway, so I'm not sure what you'd actually respond with. It would be something along the lines of "Israel sucks, Palestinians rule!" It is amusing to me how some people, on a message board expressly designed for discussion, will take the time to write out a post which basically says "I don't have anything to respond with, so I'll announce that I'm ignoring it." That's fine. because it's neither here nor there.

    Watto, you can continue that mentality all you want because I realize you've firmly chosen sides. But the bottom line is that it's not working now, and it hasn't worked for 64 years. It will not get the Palestinians the legitimacy they seek. You keep pretending that any change the Palestinians undertake would happen in isolation. But the sentiment behind your post is still based on payback, revenge, conflict, however you want to characterize it, and it's not productive. Again, your only point seems to be to repeat that "it's not fair," and then ignore how other nations react to that mentality. Who achieved greater results? Gandhi or Che Guevara? It's an oversimplification, because each situation is different, but yeah, in a nutshell it's that simple.

    You keep mentioning how pride is involved, and how what happened back in 1947 will never be forgotten, and how the occupation is unfair, and how the Palestinians will struggle until the last man stands. Great, all those things are probably true. Except with sustenance level poverty, 60% unemployment, and plenty of conflict-related casualties to go around, the rest of the world just might ignore them until the last man is literally left. What good would that do? Right now, internal examination is the best thing the collective group can do.

    If the goal is to undue the occupation, then the Palestinians have to convince those powers that it would be worth it to do so. At the moment, that isn't happening, because the Palestinians themselves aren't innocent victims, they're neck deep in the conflict. It doesn't mean that Israel is always right. It doesn't mean that Israel is always wrong. (and vice versa) It's that the "it's not fair" mantra is not productive at all. And it's not going to happen until things change from within.
  14. SuperWatto Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Sep 19, 2000
    star 5
    FID, typing out injustice is always a noble thing to do, no matter who you type it to. Besides, I'm under the impression that 44's views have some merit, even if only as a touchstone for what the military-industrial complex thinks.

    Also, I don't disagree with 44's idea that "internal examination is the best thing the collective group can do". Indeed, whining at the Tribunal in The Hague isn't getting them anywhere. Rockets aren't getting them anywhere. So what's left to do for them? Examine how they can win hearts and minds.

    Where we disagree is on two things, the first being that 44 thinks that I'm coming from a revenge and payback angle. He might be surprised that my position stems from a need for security. My opinion is that the world is not safe from jihadists as long as the recruiting magnet that this conflict is has not been settled. And it can only be settled when it is settled justly; respecting of human rights. This is where my opinion stops. For the rest I'm just a mouthpiece of the human rights movement. And the Tribunal. Whatever they think, I think. If Hamas commits an atrocity, I'll denounce it. If the IDF does, I'll denounce it. Fact is, the IDF has done it much more, and much more lethal, since before Hamas was founded.

    One of these parties has a mean PR machine. The other doesn't. And that's the side that's trampled on. So all I'm doing is providing them with their bit of PR.

    Because that is the second thing we disagree on: that anything should be expected from the Palestinians themselves. They're not even allowed to properly organize themselves, they're actively being isolated, one by one, so how can you even begin to expect anything of them collectively? And how can you hold them accountable collectively, for anything? To do so is to misjudge the situation. It's to admit you don't know what you're talking about, even if you do know what military deals are being made.
  15. Mr44 VIP

    Member Since:
    May 21, 2002
    star 6
    Also, I don't disagree with 44's idea that "internal examination is the best thing the collective group can do". Indeed, whining at the Tribunal in The Hague isn't getting them anywhere. Rockets aren't getting them anywhere. So what's left to do for them? Examine how they can win hearts and minds.

    Then we agree completely.

    Where we disagree is on two things, the first being that 44 thinks that I'm coming from a revenge and payback angle. He might be surprised that my position stems from a need for security. My opinion is that the world is not safe from jihadists as long as the recruiting magnet that this conflict is has not been settled. And it can only be settled when it is settled justly; respecting of human rights.

    And we both agree on this point. We might not agree on all the substance. Because this issue is the one that is used both correctly and incorrectly by both sides. What's security to one vs human rights to the other? You're correct in the PR plays a large role, but that's the nature of the world. I'd disagree on the scope and scale though.

    Because that is the second thing we disagree on: that anything should be expected from the Palestinians themselves.

    Except it has to come from the Palestinians themselves. Your assessment would only make sense if say, the entire area was "unclaimed," and both sides were vying to take it, so it came down to who presented the better resume. Except Israel already has a country. Israel doesn't have to do anything else, except perhaps defend itself, and the status quo will work in its favor. That's why I think it was J-w who previously asked "why is it being presented like only the Palestinians want something?" Well, because, the Palestinians want something that they can't provide for themselves, so by default, they have to sell themselves to others.

    The Palestinians are isolated for a variety of factors, one of those reasons is the consequences of Israeli occupation. But the other reasons are because they default to leaders like Arafat, who while coming as close as any Palestinian leader came to achieving a smattering of goals, also squandered vast resources on personal mansions and luxury complexes. It's because they elect, for whatever valid reason they feel, internationally recognized terrorist organizations to be their face. It's because, time and time again, they allow nations like Syria and Iran to drag them into proxy conflicts. Their are numerous reasons for such isolation, the majority not being dependent on Israel at all.

    And if you noticed, I also discussed economic factors as well, not just military ones. Israel is successful because it's integrated into the world economy, such as with the humus export example. The Indian technology swap I previously mentioned also includes computer technology, that will most likely work its way into the Indian civilian market. Sure, due to Israel's situation, military deals play a large role in Israeli politics, but its certainly not limited to the military industrial complex. And more importantly, it's not being achieved by the Palestinians.
  16. Fire_Ice_Death Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2001
    star 7
    I don't think his views have any merit as they're essentially tantamount to a bully putting someone in the corner for 'misbehaving' and then kicking and punching the bullied while asking, "Why are you making me do this to you?" Meanwhile the US is on the sidelines cheering them on going, "You show them! By the way, you'll remember us when Jesus returns, right?" If anything it's his views and the people in power who hold similar sentiments that's the reason why this conflict won't go away to begin with.

    But good news! The Rafah border will be opened permanently. Hopefully this will help the Palestinian people. Hopefully. Somehow I doubt Israel will act rationally or fairly when this happens.
  17. Alpha-Red Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 25, 2004
    star 5
    Sure the Palestinians had/have corrupt leaders, but what do you expect from an economically impoverished society? And sure they've resorted to terrorism, and terrorism is unacceptable, but Israel has done much to push them to violence. Again, what can you expect from a backward impoverished pre-Enlightenment society? You might as well expect Afghans to eliminate corruption overnight, or Pakistanis to embrace secular liberalism tomorrow.

    What if America's Civil Rights movement had turned violent? We would've had to suppress angry violent protesters, we would've had to put mob ringleaders in jail, but does the fact that rioters turned violent make discrimination a good thing? What if someone said, "Look at all those barbarian niggers! We can't give them equal rights, we should lock them up in ghettos and keep them there forever!" That's basically what right-wing Israelis like Netanyahu are saying. It's a cycle of oppression and violence, but usually the rich and wealthy oppressors are the ones who ought to know better, who can do more to end the conflict, but will most often just deny their part in fueling conflict.
  18. SuperWatto Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Sep 19, 2000
    star 5
    But so do we. We also want something we can't provide for ourselves: peace in the Middle-East. Less jihadism. An end to this conflict. A less lawless world (well, at lease some of us want that). So I guess your point is that we don't want it desperately enough?
  19. Vaderize03 Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Oct 25, 1999
    star 5
    You raise an interesting point, Watto.

    Would a solution to the conflict result in less jihadism? Somewhat, to be sure, but that goes to the deeper goals of the jihadist movement, which would surely continue to exist in the presence of an equitable solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that ensured peace and justice for both parties.

    Thanks to Lost on Hoth for the technical clarification on the UN. I will point out that in the US, a technical issue such as "terrorist group" vs "nation-state"-and the UN's ability to only "technically" deal with one and be "forced" to ignore the other, is considered moral cowardice. If that is truly the case, then the UN charter needs to be changed.

    Peace,

    V-03
  20. Mr44 VIP

    Member Since:
    May 21, 2002
    star 6
    But so do we. We also want something we can't provide for ourselves: peace in the Middle-East. Less jihadism. An end to this conflict. A less lawless world (well, at lease some of us want that). So I guess your point is that we don't want it desperately enough?

    I suppose that's true, because realistically, if we (collective) wanted to achieve this, it would happen. But the issue is that there are all sorts of areas in the world where this applies, which I suppose, is a topic for the "universal morality" thread.
  21. JediSmuggler Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 5, 1999
    star 5
    Hamas's charter calls for the destruction of Israel, and does not seem to be above genocide to obtain that goal. I, for one, don't see how we can give so much as an inch to that sort of entity. What would be an acceptable compromise, let them destroy half of Israel?

    If the Palestinians do not turn away from jihadism or groups like Hamas, and recognize that Israel has a right to exist, then the Israelis have nothing to discuss with them.
  22. Jediflyer Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Dec 5, 2001
    star 5

    The current Israeli administration and the entire right-wing settlement faction does not recognize a Palestinian right to exist.

  23. Alpha-Red Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 25, 2004
    star 5
    Who cares what their charter says? As long as they're not actively carrying it out, I could care less. Hamas doesn't really have that much fight left in them, and a good number of moderates are amenable to a truce with Israel. Whether Hamas recognizes Israel's "right to exist" is entirely and absolutely irrelevant because of one reason: the Israeli Defense Force.
  24. Vaderize03 Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Oct 25, 1999
    star 5
    Jedismuggler-

    Is there a question in your response to my post? I asked an open-ended one without necessarily taking a side, yet you seem to have responded in a way that implies I am defending Hamas.

    Obviously, I am not. The post of my comments were in reference to earlier remarks that eliminating Israel would in reality not have much of a long-term effect on the jihadist movement, as the West would still exist.

    Peace,

    V-03
  25. JediSmuggler Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 5, 1999
    star 5
    I was not implying that you were defending Hamas, although I think that is a fair statement to be made about other posters on this thread. I'm simply pointing out that there is no real way to compromise with Hamas even on Israel.

    Furthermore, recent events seem to indicate that the rest of the Palestinian leadership just is not bothered by their genocidal intentions.