Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less

That's a well written, informative yet insufficient piece on the origins of Zionism. It explains, very well, what gave birth to the idea of Zionism and then, dismissively, reduces the opposition to the movement to a religious faction.

I don't really see where Avineri does that, he doesn't discuss opposition to Zionism at all since that is not the subject of the piece. However he acknowledges that only a small minority of Jews who left Europe during the period in question went to Palestine, and that Jews responded in different ways to the various problems they faced in reconciling their identity with the demands of modern European nationalism. It's just a short piece clarifying how Zionism was in its origins a secular response to the challenges facing late nineteenth century European Jews (which is the only reason I posted it), but it doesn't state or imply that Zionism was the only secular response. A broader discussion on that topic would eat up a lot more than twelves pages, but for what it's worth, Avineri has written the following in a different piece:

"the end of the 19th century witnessed the birth not only of Zionism but of a number of different attempts to “normalize” the status of Jews. In the annus mirabilis of 1897 Herzl convened the First Zionist Congress in Basel in August, the Jewish socialist Bund was founded in Vilna in October, and the leading industrialist Walther Rathenau published a haunting and somewhat neglected plea for radical assimilation, evocatively titled Hear, O Israel, in Berlin. Political Zionism argued that normalization could be achieved only if the Jews were to have a state of their own, like all other nations; the Bundists argued that Jews should strive for integration into the societies in which they were living through a universal socialist revolution that would nonetheless give them a distinct place in the new world order alongside other nations; and Rathenau suggested that Jews could attain integration into German society if they would redefine themselves as a German tribe, like Saxons, Bavarians, or Prussians...​
... Despite its efforts to reach out to the Jewish masses and to win over world public opinion, the Zionist organization established in Basel remained a very modest enterprise until World War I. It continued to hold annual congresses even after the early death of Herzl in 1904. It helped to inspire Jewish immigration to Palestine and the founding of a number of villages and towns, including Tel Aviv, but it remained marginal in Jewish life and world politics. The Bund, on the other hand, despite its small start in a Vilna basement, became a mass movement, at one time numbering more members than the general Russian Social Democratic Labor Party, with which it was affiliated. For a time after World War I, it was the largest Jewish party in the Sejm of independent Poland. Rathenau’s call for radical assimilation did not ameliorate the position of German Jews. Rathenau himself, who helped more than anyone else to organize the German economic war effort and later became foreign minister in the Weimar Republic, was assassinated in 1922 by an ultranationalist, anti-Semitic German militia that accused him of treachery."​
 
We could debate and argue ad infinitum, without you addressing the main issue. Meanwhile, Israel is killing Palestinians by the dozens.
 
We could debate and argue ad infinitum, without you addressing the main issue. Meanwhile, Israel is killing Palestinians by the dozens.

Like I said, my post was only in response to the incredulity of another poster at the idea that Zionism could be secular. That's the only issue I was addressing, and to judge by your post #8,234 it seems you are in agreement with me on that question - "Early Zionists were mostly atheist and secular Jewish colonialists..."
 
Like I said, my post was only in response to the incredulity of another poster at the idea that Zionism could be secular. That's the only issue I was addressing, and to judge by your post #8,234 it seems you are in agreement with me on that question - "Early Zionists were mostly atheist and secular Jewish colonialists..."
Of course I agree on a documented historical fact. That said, Hasanejaz isn't completely wrong either.
Anyway, I'm out of this thread for a while. Arguing over semantics on the internet while my people are being massacred makes me feel shame. Sorry.
 
Israeli troops have killed at least 11 Palestinians and wounded dozens more during a raid in the occupied West Bank, Palestinian health officials say.

Explosions and gunfire sounded as troops entered the old city of Nablus on Wednesday morning, sparking armed clashes with Palestinian gunmen.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-64732006
 
it wasn’t apartheid, it is now.

Today Israel annexed land de Jure by giving transferring control of the occupied territory to the terrorist smotrich. Granting civilian government control over occupied territory has the dual effect of annexation in CA and COGAT and enforcing a dual law system, aka apartheid .

it also transfers control of illegal construction from the army to smotrich and Bibi, meaning it will not get demolished, whilst illegal Palestinian construction will be quickly destroyed.

Sad days. protests from the army getting louder,
 
It's a shame that fearless isn't here to tell us how perfectly normal this is all.

How it can't be apartheid because the Palestinians apparently have their own self government or try to talk about why it's normal for an army of one entity to enter the territory of an apparently self governing entity, kill over 10 people and justify it by posting some random video from Gaza.
 
It's a shame that fearless isn't here to tell us how perfectly normal this is all.

How it can't be apartheid because the Palestinians apparently have their own self government or try to talk about why it's normal for an army of one entity to enter the territory of an apparently self governing entity, kill over 10 people and justify it by posting some random video from Gaza.

Its a word that gets randomly thrown around without any meaning with regards to this conflict.

Unfortunately this is the textbook definition though. Transferring power from the army to the civilian administration blatantly violates the international laws of occupation as well as expressing sovereignty.

If you’re from the U.K., this is a very similar situation to the Tory government right now. Nobody wants them or their cnut policy, but there’s no way to remove them. The head of the army has even had to call for calm, and remind them they can’t be involved in politics on duty.

The difference is of course that the U.K. is not a powder keg, and it’s not viable to send the immigrants to Rwanda with the army, or to actually start Victorian work camps for the poor. In Israel this policy affects and impacts so many lives.

66% of Israelis totally against them, 14% more want modification to major policy. Only 20% support them. Total shambles.
 
So when do we start sending tanks and planes to the west bank, now that their territory has been formally annexed?
 
Because they are USA allies and CNN is not talking about it every day.

We all know why they don't, massive money to the government from pro-Israel lobbies and also pressure exerted by groups that will claim any criticism as anti-semetism.
 
How are Israel's policies not apartheid-esque?

It's absolutely ridiculous. It's not that people aren't seeing this happen. They're just happy, very happy, to completely ignore it. It's not the media, it's the people.
 
So when do we start sending tanks and planes to the west bank, now that their territory has been formally annexed?

I know the question is rhetoric, and hence you do not expect a serious answer, but anyway here is an answer from a Greek, for those who are interested to hear another perspective on the issue.

For some (many?) of us in the West, Israel vs Arabs is like Ukraine vs Russia. Russia has more money and people than Ukraine, and wants to erase Ukraine from the map. Arabs have more money and people than Israel, and want to erase Israel from the map. In the past, Arab countries tried to invade and destroy Israel, the same way that Russia invaded Ukraine. So, the weak side here is Israel. That's the big picture.

Yes, of course, as Greeks we want to help the Palestinians, and we do help the Palestinians and we have helped Palestinians in the past. However, we also believe that most of the Palestinians are not really alone in the world, most of the Palestinians are Arabs, and the Arabic countries are their brothers. Correct me if I am wrong, but I think that the concept "Palestinians" was created with the creation of Israel, there was no such nationality before, there is no "Palestinian language", the people who lived in those lands were Arabs, Greek Orthodox, Catholics, Jews... but there were no "Palestinians" as a separate people before the creation of Israel. This does not mean that *today* Palestinians do not exist, of course Palestinians exist today, but it means that it is logical to expect that they should receive the majority of the humanitarian help from the rich Arab countries (who have enough money to buy football clubs in Europe and invest in companies in the United States). So, the main responsibility for helping the Palestinians resides with the Arab countries, not with the Europeans. On the contrary, the Europeans have a responsibility to help Israel survive, because it was the Europians who made the decision to create the country of Israel and encourage the migration of Jews to Israel.

Despite of all that, I am sure that most Greeks and most Europeans, want to see peace in those lands, and want to help achieve lasting peace. But it is really hard to see how. Both sides have too many hard core fundamentalists.
 
I know the question is rhetoric, and hence you do not expect a serious answer, but anyway here is an answer from a Greek, for those who are interested to hear another perspective on the issue.

For some (many?) of us in the West, Israel vs Arabs is like Ukraine vs Russia. Russia has more money and people than Ukraine, and wants to erase Ukraine from the map. Arabs have more money and people than Israel, and want to erase Israel from the map. In the past, Arab countries tried to invade and destroy Israel, the same way that Russia invaded Ukraine. So, the weak side here is Israel. That's the big picture.

Yes, of course, as Greeks we want to help the Palestinians, and we do help the Palestinians and we have helped Palestinians in the past. However, we also believe that most of the Palestinians are not really alone in the world, most of the Palestinians are Arabs, and the Arabic countries are their brothers. Correct me if I am wrong, but I think that the concept "Palestinians" was created with the creation of Israel, there was no such nationality before, there is no "Palestinian language", the people who lived in those lands were Arabs, Greek Orthodox, Catholics, Jews... but there were no "Palestinians" as a separate people before the creation of Israel. This does not mean that *today* Palestinians do not exist, of course Palestinians exist today, but it means that it is logical to expect that they should receive the majority of the humanitarian help from the rich Arab countries (who have enough money to buy football clubs in Europe and invest in companies in the United States). So, the main responsibility for helping the Palestinians resides with the Arab countries, not with the Europeans. On the contrary, the Europeans have a responsibility to help Israel survive, because it was the Europians who made the decision to create the country of Israel and encourage the migration of Jews to Israel.

Despite of all that, I am sure that most Greeks and most Europeans, want to see peace in those lands, and want to help achieve lasting peace. But it is really hard to see how. Both sides have too many hard core fundamentalists.
What the feck is this utter shite.
 
What the feck is this utter shite.

That's what most of my friends in Greece believe about the situation. Is it wrong?


By the way, are you Greek yourself? Long time ago, when I was growing up, I had a friend who we all called "Corinthian" because he was born in Corinth (city in Greece)! I have no idea where he is now, it would be funny if I met him again in a Man Utd forum after so many years!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corinth
 
Last edited:
Incredible. Tell us, as a Greek, how do you feel about Bosnians and Serbs?
 
That's what most of my friends in Greece believe about the situation. Is it wrong?


By the way, are you Greek yourself? Long time ago, when I was growing up, I had a friend who we all called "Corinthian" because he was born in Corinth (city in Greece)! I have no idea where he is now, it would be funny if I met him again in a Man Utd forum after so many years!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corinth

:lol:
 
I know the question is rhetoric, and hence you do not expect a serious answer, but anyway here is an answer from a Greek, for those who are interested to hear another perspective on the issue.

For some (many?) of us in the West, Israel vs Arabs is like Ukraine vs Russia. Russia has more money and people than Ukraine, and wants to erase Ukraine from the map. Arabs have more money and people than Israel, and want to erase Israel from the map. In the past, Arab countries tried to invade and destroy Israel, the same way that Russia invaded Ukraine. So, the weak side here is Israel. That's the big picture.

Yes, of course, as Greeks we want to help the Palestinians, and we do help the Palestinians and we have helped Palestinians in the past. However, we also believe that most of the Palestinians are not really alone in the world, most of the Palestinians are Arabs, and the Arabic countries are their brothers. Correct me if I am wrong, but I think that the concept "Palestinians" was created with the creation of Israel, there was no such nationality before, there is no "Palestinian language", the people who lived in those lands were Arabs, Greek Orthodox, Catholics, Jews... but there were no "Palestinians" as a separate people before the creation of Israel. This does not mean that *today* Palestinians do not exist, of course Palestinians exist today, but it means that it is logical to expect that they should receive the majority of the humanitarian help from the rich Arab countries (who have enough money to buy football clubs in Europe and invest in companies in the United States). So, the main responsibility for helping the Palestinians resides with the Arab countries, not with the Europeans. On the contrary, the Europeans have a responsibility to help Israel survive, because it was the Europians who made the decision to create the country of Israel and encourage the migration of Jews to Israel.

Despite of all that, I am sure that most Greeks and most Europeans, want to see peace in those lands, and want to help achieve lasting peace. But it is really hard to see how. Both sides have too many hard core fundamentalists.

To get things straight first, people living in current Palestine are descendants of Canaanites, who lived there before the Israelites settled there. Not that it matters but even if you want to peddle the stupid argument that all Jewish people have some inherent right to a place in that land, over people living their for centuries, because their ancestors were displaced from there a millennium ago, those already there have just as much argument in that case.

About Arabs wanting to destroy Israel. Yes, those wars from the Arabs were not right given that Israel as a country was established by the, but that doesn't give any right to Israel to occupy and treat Palestinians horribly. I don't remember England and France continuing to occupy Germany into the 80's, slowly kicking Germans out from their homes and replacing them with Frenchman and English. Also, let's not forget that Israel was created by expelling Palestinians already living there, Jews were not the majority on that land yet they were given right to rule. Ofcourse that was going to lead to resentment and war.

The biggest issue in this is Israel continuing to occupy land that isn't theirs and humiliating the people living there. It's perfectly understandable that those people will try to fight back aggressively rather than laying down and letting Israel slowly wipe them from their land.
 
Last edited:
I know the question is rhetoric, and hence you do not expect a serious answer, but anyway here is an answer from a Greek, for those who are interested to hear another perspective on the issue.

For some (many?) of us in the West, Israel vs Arabs is like Ukraine vs Russia. Russia has more money and people than Ukraine, and wants to erase Ukraine from the map. Arabs have more money and people than Israel, and want to erase Israel from the map. In the past, Arab countries tried to invade and destroy Israel, the same way that Russia invaded Ukraine. So, the weak side here is Israel. That's the big picture.

Yes, of course, as Greeks we want to help the Palestinians, and we do help the Palestinians and we have helped Palestinians in the past. However, we also believe that most of the Palestinians are not really alone in the world, most of the Palestinians are Arabs, and the Arabic countries are their brothers. Correct me if I am wrong, but I think that the concept "Palestinians" was created with the creation of Israel, there was no such nationality before, there is no "Palestinian language", the people who lived in those lands were Arabs, Greek Orthodox, Catholics, Jews... but there were no "Palestinians" as a separate people before the creation of Israel. This does not mean that *today* Palestinians do not exist, of course Palestinians exist today, but it means that it is logical to expect that they should receive the majority of the humanitarian help from the rich Arab countries (who have enough money to buy football clubs in Europe and invest in companies in the United States). So, the main responsibility for helping the Palestinians resides with the Arab countries, not with the Europeans. On the contrary, the Europeans have a responsibility to help Israel survive, because it was the Europians who made the decision to create the country of Israel and encourage the migration of Jews to Israel.

Despite of all that, I am sure that most Greeks and most Europeans, want to see peace in those lands, and want to help achieve lasting peace. But it is really hard to see how. Both sides have too many hard core fundamentalists.
Crikey.
 


@frostbite yea, Israel is Ukraine.


I am currently watching "Valley of Tears" (recommended!) and have been reading about the wars back in 1973, and yes it reminded me of Ukraine. I read that after the "Six-Day War" in 1967 Israel relaxed, and because it relaxed they almost lost the Yom Kippur War. However, after the "Yom Kippur War" they changed their approach and became much more militaristic. They did not want to face another attack unprepared.

I think that if Ukraine makes peace with Russia, it will be inevitable that it will be more militaristic in the future, and Ukraine will spend much more on its military than the average European country. Because they will always be afraid of another attack from Russia. The smaller country that was attacked by a much larger force, even if it wins, it feels vulnerable for a very long time. Ukraine will not be safe in the future. What if America does not help the next time Russia attacks?

The same happened to Greece. Turkey invaded Cyprus in 1974 and it still illegaly occupies 36% of Cyprus. Since then, Greece spends a lot of money on the military because Greece is afraid that Turkey will attack another Greek island. I think that Greece spends more per capita than every other NATO country! All Greeks would prefer to spend all this money on other things, Greece is not militaristic and does not want to attack anyone, but the need to protect itself is real, unfortunately there are dogfights with Turkey daily.

The question is: how can we resolve these conflicts for a lasting peace?
 
I am currently watching "Valley of Tears" (recommended!) and have been reading about the wars back in 1973, and yes it reminded me of Ukraine. I read that after the "Six-Day War" in 1967 Israel relaxed, and because it relaxed they almost lost the Yom Kippur War. However, after the "Yom Kippur War" they changed their approach and became much more militaristic. They did not want to face another attack unprepared.

I think that if Ukraine makes peace with Russia, it will be inevitable that it will be more militaristic in the future, and Ukraine will spend much more on its military than the average European country. Because they will always be afraid of another attack from Russia. The smaller country that was attacked by a much larger force, even if it wins, it feels vulnerable for a very long time. Ukraine will not be safe in the future. What if America does not help the next time Russia attacks?

The same happened to Greece. Turkey invaded Cyprus in 1974 and it still illegaly occupies 36% of Cyprus. Since then, Greece spends a lot of money on the military because Greece is afraid that Turkey will attack another Greek island. I think that Greece spends more per capita than every other NATO country! All Greeks would prefer to spend all this money on other things, Greece is not militaristic and does not want to attack anyone, but the need to protect itself is real, unfortunately there are dogfights with Turkey daily.

The question is: how can we resolve these conflicts for a lasting peace?

It's funny that you're watching material from 1967-73 and not from before when Arabs were expelled from their homes.

I already said the wars at that time were wrong. I'll ask you, why didn't England, Netherlands, Belgium, France and other neighbouring countries continue to occupy and throw out Germans after from 1945 till now? Germany committed had two wars against those countries in 2 decades.

You talk about Turkey illegally occupying Cyprus, how is Israel not doing the same in Palestine?

You sadly seem incredibly ignorant on the issue and bring presented with just one side. Wars that happened in the past were wrong, but wars have happened in the past and there is no justification for their treatment of the Palestinians. Otherwise most of the world would be in occupation from one country or another.
 
It's funny that you're watching material from 1967-73 and not from before when Arabs were expelled from their homes.

I already said the wars at that time were wrong. I'll ask you, why didn't England, Netherlands, Belgium, France and other neighbouring countries continue to occupy and throw out Germans after from 1945 till now? Germany committed had two wars against those countries in 2 decades.

You talk about Turkey illegally occupying Cyprus, how is Israel not doing the same in Palestine?

You sadly seem incredibly ignorant on the issue and bring presented with just one side. Wars that happened in the past were wrong, but wars have happened in the past and there is no justification for their treatment of the Palestinians. Otherwise most of the world would be in occupation from one country or another.

England, France, USSR, occupied Germany for 45 years. And during that time, Germany developed an excellent democracy, one of the best in the world. If Germany was expressing their desire to conquer France once again, then I am sure that France would still be occupying Germany. Sadly, the Palestinians do not have a functioning democracy today, this by itself is a huge problem, and perhaps this is one problem they can solve by themselves, peacefully.

Cyprus did not have any allies that attacked Turkey, and doesn't send rockets against Turkey, despite how many Cypriots the Turkish army killed. That's a huge difference. Cyprus presents zero threat to Turkey, Cyprus has one million people and practically zero military, Turkey has 80 million people and the strongest military in the Middle East.

The Arab countries should be advocating stronger for Turkey to get out of Cyprus. The Arab countries and the Palestinians have a lot of contacts with Turkey, but they have done very little to help Cyrpus in practice. If they had achieved making Turkey stop the occupation of Cyprus, then I am sure that Greece would also be a stronger advocate for the Palestinians. You can't constantly be asking for help without doing anything in return.

I am not justifying any bad treatment of anyone by anyone. Millitarization of any society leads to excessive violence. We see the same things in the USA: the police has become more and more militarized, and this leads to excessive violence by the police. The question is: how can we achieve less militarization in the Middle East?
 
I am not justifying any bad treatment of anyone by anyone.
hand-gesture.gif
 
.........

I already said the wars at that time were wrong. I'll ask you, why didn't England, Netherlands, Belgium, France and other neighbouring countries continue to occupy and throw out Germans after from 1945 till now? Germany committed had two wars against those countries in 2 decades. ....
You want to know why?
It was just luck or call it coincidence.

At the end of the day, US, UK and France feared the SSSR more than the Nazis. They needed a streng shield against the commies which was eventually West Germany.

Had it not been for the fear of the red wave, I do not believe that Germany would have existed today.
 
England, France, USSR, occupied Germany for 45 years. And during that time, Germany developed an excellent democracy, one of the best in the world. If Germany was expressing their desire to conquer France once again, then I am sure that France would still be occupying Germany. Sadly, the Palestinians do not have a functioning democracy today, this by itself is a huge problem, and perhaps this is one problem they can solve by themselves, peacefully.

Cyprus did not have any allies that attacked Turkey, and doesn't send rockets against Turkey, despite how many Cypriots the Turkish army killed. That's a huge difference. Cyprus presents zero threat to Turkey, Cyprus has one million people and practically zero military, Turkey has 80 million people and the strongest military in the Middle East.

The Arab countries should be advocating stronger for Turkey to get out of Cyprus. The Arab countries and the Palestinians have a lot of contacts with Turkey, but they have done very little to help Cyrpus in practice. If they had achieved making Turkey stop the occupation of Cyprus, then I am sure that Greece would also be a stronger advocate for the Palestinians. You can't constantly be asking for help without doing anything in return.

I am not justifying any bad treatment of anyone by anyone. Millitarization of any society leads to excessive violence. We see the same things in the USA: the police has become more and more militarized, and this leads to excessive violence by the police. The question is: how can we achieve less militarization in the Middle East?

Wait when did England and France occupy Germany for 45 years? I understand saying USSR implicitly eventhough East Germany was separate from USSR. It certainly helped Germany develop a democracy when they weren't being occupied by other countries and Germans slowly being expelled from their country for French people moving into their homes. Again, this isn't how trying to create peace works, what Israel is doing is ethnic cleansing.

Once again, you continue to ignore the biggest issue that brought about this controversy, Palestinians bring expelled from their homes in 1948 because the British decided to give a land they had majority over to Israel.

What does Arab countries relations with Turkey and Cyprus have to do with Palestine? I hope you know Turkey and Arabs have little in common, they are very different cultures and Arabs had to fight for their independence from the Ottomons in the early 20th century. So I don't think they have any favours with each other, such as military support like how the US does with Saudi.

And you have pretty much been justifying what Israel has been doing this entire time, so don't make it seem like you're being neutral in any way. Your comment about Turkey, Cyprus and Greece also pretty much shows you have a bias against Muslims by trying to equate Turkey and Arabs together.
 
Wait when did England and France occupy Germany for 45 years? I understand saying USSR implicitly eventhough East Germany was separate from USSR. It certainly helped Germany develop a democracy when they weren't being occupied by other countries and Germans slowly being expelled from their country for French people moving into their homes. Japan have a history of invading countries to their West, why haven't they been occupied by China and Korea after WWII as well? Again, this isn't how trying to create peace works, what Israel is doing is ethnic cleansing.

The UK, France and the USA occupied W Germany / W Berlin until 1990 in their occupation zones. It wasn't as brutal and repressive as the Soviets but the country wasn't legally independent until reunification in 1990, when US/USSR/UK/France formally renounced their claims to German territory.

The USA occupied Japan too, and still have troops there and Korea. Also millions of ethnic Germans were displaced (ethnically cleansed) in the years after WW2 from land east of Germany.

With all that said I don't think that this in any way undermines the point of what you are saying and arguing. I just don't think you need to make the comparisons to Europe after WW2.
 
That's what most of my friends in Greece believe about the situation. Is it wrong?


By the way, are you Greek yourself? Long time ago, when I was growing up, I had a friend who we all called "Corinthian" because he was born in Corinth (city in Greece)! I have no idea where he is now, it would be funny if I met him again in a Man Utd forum after so many years!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corinth

Did most of your friends completely change their opinion on Israel a year ago, just like you did?

This is a view you personally hold. Some people were pointing out a perceived inconsistency in how we (the West/NATO/whatever) react to occopied areas: Ukraine and Palestine. This made you decide that, no, it is in fact Israel that is in danger here, so everything is as it should be. Just like you suddenly decided that helping Saudi Arabia bomb Yemen is also good.