Israel, Hamas and a dozen dead people...

[Ddrak]

So we have 3 dead students killed by (insert opposing party here), about a dozen dead Palestinians that were looking for them, Hamas promising Armageddon 2.0 and Israel acting "not if we deliver it first".

Just fucking wonderful, and goes back to my core belief that none of them are the "good" guys.

Dd

[Kulaf]

For the HORDE!

[Fallakin Kuvari]

For the HORDE!

Lok'tar Ogar!!!

[Arathena]

... Those are an entirely too civilized breed of orcs for the region. Better would be:

"WAAAAAUGH!!! Orks iz made for fightan... and winnan!"

[Ddrak]

Definitely gets more interesting now a bunch of Israelis grabbed and burned a Palestinian kid to death, then grabbed another one who happened to be a US citizen and beat the hell out of him.

Dd

[Ddrak]

This rings somewhat true from the news reports I've read over the last decade or so: Israel does not want peace.

On the assumption that Israel’s decisions are rational, it is impossible to accept construction in the territories and the aspiration to peace as mutually coexisting. Every act of building in the settlements, every mobile home and every balcony, conveys rejection. If Israel had wanted to achieve peace through the Oslo Accords, it would at least have stopped the construction in the settlements at its own initiative. That this did not happen proves that Oslo was fraudulent, or at best the chronicle of a failure foretold. If Israel had wanted to achieve peace at Taba, at Camp David, at Sharm el-Sheikh, in Washington or in Jerusalem, its first move should have been to end all construction in the territories. Unconditionally. Without a quid pro quo. The fact that Israel did not is proof that it did not want a just peace.

Dd

[Kulaf]

It can't just be Israel and the Palestinians at the table or there will NEVER be peace. It must also include Lebanon, Egypt, Syria and Jordan. They all caused the problems......they all need to be part of the solution.

Let's look at a similar example in the annexation of the Eastern Bloc by the USSR at the end of WWII. Why did they do it? Every attack against their country had come through Germany in one form or another. They wanted a buffer of land to prevent attack. Israel feels the same way.

What incentive does Israel have to go back to the original boundaries of their country when they are still surrounded by enemies? The only way there is ever going to be peace there is at a regional level.

[Ddrak]

I'd say France and Great Britain caused the problems with their screwed up national boundaries that didn't make any sense. Anyway, we're here now...

The most interesting statement in the article (to me) was to raise the point that they've never stated what land they actually do and don't want in any sort of arrangement, or how they'd expect normalised relations to work. Do they actually want all the West Bank? What do they see as the future of Gaza? What's the boundary in the Golan Heights that would satisfy? At least the Negev is clear!

Of all the parties involved that at least claim to want a dialog, I think Israel is the least clear on what they want from peace. Even claiming that they want some buffer space is flawed because the evolution of weapons dictate the need for more and more buffer - a clearly impossible demand.

Even if there were governments in all the nations capable of sitting at a table, I don't think there's even consensus on what certain parties really want that can be worked into a compromise.

Dd

[Embar Angylwrath]

If you were the in a region where every other country around you wanted to wipe you off the map, what do you think would be a reasonable response?

[Ddrak]

If you were the in a region where every other country around you wanted to wipe you off the map, what do you think would be a reasonable response?

First of all, they aren't. That's just a delusion now.
Second, killing children on a beach and other forms of collective punishment is probably not going to help. It might return things to the bit where everyone wanted to wipe you from a map though!

Dd

[Ddrak]

More thoughts: Are there any rational solutions? I can't see how a two state solution could work being split by Israel, and not really solving the major issue of how do you stop terrorists, which they're failing to do under the current situation. Perhaps Israel simply annexing Gaza and the West Bank would be best, but that would mean they need to offer citizenship to all the Arabs currently in both places, include them in the IDF and treat terrorism as a crime instead of a military matter. Can anyone see THAT happening?

Dd

[Ddrak]

I definitely enjoyed Russell Brand's demolition of Hannity:



Dd

[Partha]

More thoughts: Are there any rational solutions? I can't see how a two state solution could work being split by Israel, and not really solving the major issue of how do you stop terrorists, which they're failing to do under the current situation. Perhaps Israel simply annexing Gaza and the West Bank would be best, but that would mean they need to offer citizenship to all the Arabs currently in both places, include them in the IDF and treat terrorism as a crime instead of a military matter. Can anyone see THAT happening?

Dd

Sadly, I am convinced there is nothing left. The influx of all the Eastern European folks have pushed that country too far rightward for any solution involving two states, and Israelis will never accept a single state where they are or could be the minority. It's all done but the shouting.

[Ddrak]

Which means the only solution is time. Eventually Israel will lose support (domestic or foreign) for their current course of action and will end up at a negotiating table under external pressure.

Dd

[Partha]

Mark where his carnage and his conquests cease!
He makes a solitude, and calls it — peace.

Lord Byron, Bride of Abydos (1813), Canto 2, stanza 20.

[Fallakin Kuvari]

I'd say France and Great Britain caused the problems with their screwed up national boundaries that didn't make any sense. Anyway, we're here now...

Great Britain and Hitler did way more damage to Palestine than Arafat. All Arafat did was tend to the seed that Hitler planted.

Of course the US, UN and other Organizations/Nations haven't helped. They continue to give money to Palestine in droves and solidify the belief that continued violence will win them more money to help propagate their cause further. The leadership in Israel, while interested in their own defense, is very much of the 'Peace Now' mindset. However this mindset will never work since One of Hama's goals being the annihilation of Israel).

Go out and Read 'Israel Test'. Its a pretty great book on all the Jews have done for the world (including liberating it from Fascism in the form Germany (Manhattan Project, Von Neumann, etc))

[Ddrak]

o_0

Trolling?

Dd

[Fallakin Kuvari]

No, just going from your GB comment;

Lets go back further -- some of the first Jewish colonists ended up back in the Palestine area as early as 1878 (Petah Tikva) and began to help revitalize the nation. That particular area was a swamp when they first arrived; They overcame the swamp conditions and malaria by 1883 (with some financial help) -- They endured their first attack from Arabs in 1886.

By 1920, after WWI, GB managed the Nation, then British Mandate of Palestine; The British were still , according to Walter Clay Lowdermilk, "imbued with old colonial traditions and befriended [Arab] feudal leaders". The Diplomats often "enjoyed going native by mimicking Arab grandees in their flowing robes" and, in turn, the Arabs "learned European ethnic prejudices and disdain for "men in trade"" (obviously 'men in trade' means Jews). The region "became smeared with Antisemitic slurs and caricatures".

Add to that the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem (Haj Amin al-Husseini) spending his time at Hitler's HQ during WW2, later Yasser Arafat would take up Husseini's helm of Antisemitism and it's pretty well known that he bought Mein Kampf in bulk and distributed it to his followers.

The other part of that -- Look at the growth of the area between 1967 and 1987 before the First Intifada -- Life expectancy rose from 48 years in 67 to 72 (by 2000), in 67 only 20.5% of the population (of gaza and west bank) had electric around the clock compared to 92.8% in 1986. The number of school children grew 102% in that time; in 1967 there were 0 universities in those areas, but by the early 90s there were 7. Above all else, there was 60% unemployment among male adults in 1967 and 0 Palestinians worked in Israel, by 1986 109,000 Palestinians worked in Israel (accounting for 35% of West Bank and 45% of Gaza's employed populations).

So, in turn, Great Britain and Hitler have done a lot of harm to the region by spreading their antisemitism to the area, or to the leaders in the area (in Hitler's case). The area was ripe for Antisemitism (as proven by the Arabs first attack on the Jews in the area in 1886), but the Jewish people have done nothing but ripen the land and make the entire region a better place. What was once a series of natural disasters (swamps, barren deserts) has become one of the leading centers of innovation in the world, much in thanks to the works of Jewish settlers to the area (and much to the chagrin of the Palestinian leaders).

[Ddrak]

Ok, first I want to make a very clear statement that you can't conflate "Jew" with "Israeli". To do so would be race baiting. Similarly, aggression against Israel is not in itself "anti-Semitism" - that's a pure strawman. Sadly, both are common tactics used by the pro-Israel lobby and are slowly but surely weakening sympathies to true racially based issues. I was reading a fairly insightful letter to an editor recently about anti-Semitism in the US that carefully described true racial attacks (wear a yarmulke, get a rock in the head type of thing) but the publication had put a "Sanction Israel" protest photo above it that destroyed the credibility of the post. Made me sad.

Israel is clearly an economic powerhouse in the area. This is irrelevant in the question of Israeli-Palestinian relations, and actually makes Israel appear more and more of a bully than anything else.
The Palestinian quality of life certainly improves when Israel allows it to. Again, irrelevant but it makes it pretty clear who is the dominant party.
Israel has suffered aggression in the past. Again irrelevant in the current discussion but serves to understand the racial and national hate from both sides.
The borders of all nations in the area make little to no sense and have resulted in massive displacement of populations, blown out cultural violence beyond all proportion and created a no-win situation for all involved. Does it even make sense to talk about "borders" where Israel is concerned these days? Evidence suggests the borders are wherever the IDF wants them to be.

The leadership of Israel is most definitely not interested in peace, nor do they have a "Peace Now" mindset. Read the article linked at the top of the thread for that. Israel has absolutely no problem with inflaming the situation whenever it feels it gains advantage. Every action of collective punishment against Palestine is driving the Palestinians to terrorism and other forms of asymmetric warfare back against Israel. Neither side is "right" in this conflict.

The harsh truth for Israel is that world opinion does matter. Support for Israel wanes every time they invade, push more settlements or clamp down on blockades. When it deteriorates to the point that another nation says "enough" and runs the blockade, the house of cards collapses and Israel must come to a negotiating table with whoever is in charge of Palestine at the time or face the prospect of being the aggressor in a war over aid. The longer the current path continues, the more radical the Palestinian leaders will be and the worse Israel will fare. There's really no good end-game from here.

Dd

[Fallakin Kuvari]

I'm going to refute your first point straight away before finishing reading this post:

You cannot have Israel without the Jew, so you can and should conflate "Jew" with "Israel". Israel got its name because the patriarch of the Jewish people, Jacob, wrestled with a man. He struggled with the man until morning, and even though he was seriously injured he would not back down. The man told Jacob to send him away because it was now morning, that they would essentially create a 'cease-fire' and give Jacob time to recover. Jacob would have none of it and would not send the man away until he made peace with him.. until he blessed him. The man revealed himself to be an angel and asked Jacob's name, then renaming him Israel. This was over 3600 years ago.

As I said, Jacob is the Patriarch of the Jewish people, he is the reason the Jews called the country they were given in 1948 'Israel'. To not conflate the two is to ignore the entire history of the Jewish people.

Also: If it had not been for the Jewish people being given the land in what was then the British Mandate of Palestine, then there would be no Israel today. It would simply be Palestine.