I had a feeling someone might object to using the example of the Nazis, but I couldn't think of another situation where a huge population has been incarcerated in a tiny uninhabitable ghetto for an extended period of time by an overwhelmingly powerful oppressor. Nevertheless, my example was an extreme one to illustrate a point. I don't think Israel is like the Nazis. I'm not an expert on critical thinking (perhaps there is someone in here who is?) but I don't think it is an example of a false analogy. Your stance however seems to be a sui generis fallacy i.e. rejecting any kind of analogy or inductive reasoning since everything is different and unique.
Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
Apologies. On reflection my OP lacked clarity. In addition to expressing my understanding for an opposition viewpoint, I should have stated that I supported the project.
Strange discussion. Isn't this pretty much what you've done here?
As in, you can weigh up the 'understandable' arguments in favour of any particular position, and yet on balance deem it unwise in the grander scheme of things.
Possibly, but I'm not even sure
When I look back at the original exchange it feels like there is a difference, but I can't even explain what it is.My apologies for taking the thread off topic. We can all get back to our favourite subject.
By Amira Hass, worth reading
On June 30, 2018
As if Israel Did Nothing Shameful Before the Advent of Smartphones
Israeli soldiers who kill unarmed Palestinians didn’t pop up for the first time three weeks ago. Nor did the army’s excuses start only then. It is you who did not read, remember or believe
Amira Hass
Apr 16, 2018 1:51 AM
Israeli soldiers take position as Palestinians protest on the Israel Gaza Strip Border, Friday, April 13, 2018.Ariel Schalit/AP
Shame is important, it’s a pity that it came so late. Shame is a necessity, it’s sad that so few people feel it. What made this belated appearance of shame possible is the technology that turned every person with a smartphone into a photographer and every social media app into a Jumbotron, bringing incriminating photographic evidence into every home. In rare cases, they seep through the wall of whitewash and deception that the Israel Defense Forces puts up and the armor of they’re-all-terrorists-anyway that Israelis don willingly.
From the long-delayed shame, we can infer that there are Israelis who believe that IDF soldiers only began wiping out unarmed Palestinians a few weeks ago. That is, they believe that only when smartphones came on the scene, with their ability to publicly expose the soldiers and their dispatchers in all their naked shame, did commanding officers start ordering their soldiers to kill even in the absence of mortal danger. In other words, that until recently, until the smartphone came along, the purity of arms was scrupulously observed and there was no room for shame. And that so it is today, in all the cases in which soldiers and police officers kill and injure Palestinians when no smartphone is there to record it. The Israelis who do feel shame believe the IDF only lies when there is photographic proof of the lie. In its absence, the IDF and the police are the truth-tellers, the Palestinians and a handful of leftists are the liars.
Shame is disheartening for another reason: It reminds us of the fragility of the written word when grounded not in the regime’s version of events but rather in the testimony of the regime’s victims. Before there were cellphones with cameras, and security cameras in every corner, we collected testimonies from dozens of eyewitnesses. We cross-checked them, verified, examined, asked questions – often we were on the scene when the incident took place – and we wrote and published. But it was always our word against that of the supremely pure being: the IDF Spokesman’s Office.
The desired image of the army and the government was crafted at the editing desks and in the streets of Tel Aviv and Kfar Sava. Every day and in every operation, the Palestinian superpower rises up to destroy us and to attack little Israel and its tender 18-year-old children who happened into the superpower’s territory. That’s not the case: The Israeli soldiers who kill unarmed Palestinians did not pop up for the first time three weeks ago. Nor did the army’s excuses start only then. It is you who did not read or do not remember or did not believe.
But tell me, you who are ashamed and rightfully so, are you not ashamed at Israel’s stealing water from the Palestinians and imposing restrictive consumption quotas on them? Are you not ashamed by Israel’s refusal to connect thousands of Palestinians in the West Bank and in Israel’s Negev to the water supply?
And when Israel expels the residents of Umm al-Hiran from their Negev township, do you not die of shame for the State and for the fine model community, based on Jewish values, that will be built on the land of the displaced? Are you not ashamed of the State for preventing Umm al-Hiran’s connection all these years to water and electricity, or the Supreme Court justices who permitted the expulsions? Do you not feel shame when a handful of Israelis descend from their settlements and outposts in order to repeatedly attack surrounding Palestinian villages? Do you not blush, or blanch, at the sight of the soldiers who stand by and let then assault, destroy, uproot and cut down? And when the police do not search for the perpetrators even when they’ve been filmed and their place of residence is known, are you not embarrassed in all our names? Are you not abashed by the mere knowledge that this method of settler violence – encouraged by the silence of the authorities – is as old as the occupation itself?
Does the following fact – 2.5 percent of the land of the state is allocated to 20 percent of the population (Palestinian citizens of Israel) – not make you want the ground to open up and swallow you, out of humiliation?
And what about the few Gazans permitted to travel abroad via the Allenby Bridge being forced to promise in writing not to return for one year? And West Bank Palestinians not being allowed to meet with friends and relatives living in the Gaza Strip? And the prohibition against selling Gazan products in the West Bank and exporting them, except for a few trucks carrying a limited number of goods? And what about imprisoning 2 million people behind barbed wire and military observation and shooting towers? All of these, in your opinion, do not deserve inclusion in the record of collective Jewish disgrace?
Israel never quailed and does not quail now at killing Palestinian civilians – individually, separately, and en masse. But killing Palestinians is not an end in itself. In contrast, Israel’s 70 years of existence prove that the appropriation of Palestinian land is a supreme goal of our state, and that the appropriation comes together with actions to reduce the number of Palestinians on that land.
Expelling Palestinians from their homes, their homeland and their country is a tried-and-true means for diminishing a population in wartime. When that isn’t feasible, concentrating the Palestinians in crowded reservations (on either side of the Green Line) is another method, routine and ongoing. Anyone who found this hard to believe before 1993 received definitive proof in the form of the Oslo Accords: Under the umbrella of the peace process, the main aim of the governments (Labor and Likud) and their bureaucracies was to prove the accusers right, that we are indeed a colonial entity at heart. Does that fill you with pride?
Amira Hass
Haaretz correspondent
On June 30, 2018
As if Israel Did Nothing Shameful Before the Advent of Smartphones
Israeli soldiers who kill unarmed Palestinians didn’t pop up for the first time three weeks ago. Nor did the army’s excuses start only then. It is you who did not read, remember or believe
Amira Hass
Apr 16, 2018 1:51 AM
Israeli soldiers take position as Palestinians protest on the Israel Gaza Strip Border, Friday, April 13, 2018.Ariel Schalit/AP
Shame is important, it’s a pity that it came so late. Shame is a necessity, it’s sad that so few people feel it. What made this belated appearance of shame possible is the technology that turned every person with a smartphone into a photographer and every social media app into a Jumbotron, bringing incriminating photographic evidence into every home. In rare cases, they seep through the wall of whitewash and deception that the Israel Defense Forces puts up and the armor of they’re-all-terrorists-anyway that Israelis don willingly.
From the long-delayed shame, we can infer that there are Israelis who believe that IDF soldiers only began wiping out unarmed Palestinians a few weeks ago. That is, they believe that only when smartphones came on the scene, with their ability to publicly expose the soldiers and their dispatchers in all their naked shame, did commanding officers start ordering their soldiers to kill even in the absence of mortal danger. In other words, that until recently, until the smartphone came along, the purity of arms was scrupulously observed and there was no room for shame. And that so it is today, in all the cases in which soldiers and police officers kill and injure Palestinians when no smartphone is there to record it. The Israelis who do feel shame believe the IDF only lies when there is photographic proof of the lie. In its absence, the IDF and the police are the truth-tellers, the Palestinians and a handful of leftists are the liars.
Shame is disheartening for another reason: It reminds us of the fragility of the written word when grounded not in the regime’s version of events but rather in the testimony of the regime’s victims. Before there were cellphones with cameras, and security cameras in every corner, we collected testimonies from dozens of eyewitnesses. We cross-checked them, verified, examined, asked questions – often we were on the scene when the incident took place – and we wrote and published. But it was always our word against that of the supremely pure being: the IDF Spokesman’s Office.
The desired image of the army and the government was crafted at the editing desks and in the streets of Tel Aviv and Kfar Sava. Every day and in every operation, the Palestinian superpower rises up to destroy us and to attack little Israel and its tender 18-year-old children who happened into the superpower’s territory. That’s not the case: The Israeli soldiers who kill unarmed Palestinians did not pop up for the first time three weeks ago. Nor did the army’s excuses start only then. It is you who did not read or do not remember or did not believe.
But tell me, you who are ashamed and rightfully so, are you not ashamed at Israel’s stealing water from the Palestinians and imposing restrictive consumption quotas on them? Are you not ashamed by Israel’s refusal to connect thousands of Palestinians in the West Bank and in Israel’s Negev to the water supply?
And when Israel expels the residents of Umm al-Hiran from their Negev township, do you not die of shame for the State and for the fine model community, based on Jewish values, that will be built on the land of the displaced? Are you not ashamed of the State for preventing Umm al-Hiran’s connection all these years to water and electricity, or the Supreme Court justices who permitted the expulsions? Do you not feel shame when a handful of Israelis descend from their settlements and outposts in order to repeatedly attack surrounding Palestinian villages? Do you not blush, or blanch, at the sight of the soldiers who stand by and let then assault, destroy, uproot and cut down? And when the police do not search for the perpetrators even when they’ve been filmed and their place of residence is known, are you not embarrassed in all our names? Are you not abashed by the mere knowledge that this method of settler violence – encouraged by the silence of the authorities – is as old as the occupation itself?
Does the following fact – 2.5 percent of the land of the state is allocated to 20 percent of the population (Palestinian citizens of Israel) – not make you want the ground to open up and swallow you, out of humiliation?
And what about the few Gazans permitted to travel abroad via the Allenby Bridge being forced to promise in writing not to return for one year? And West Bank Palestinians not being allowed to meet with friends and relatives living in the Gaza Strip? And the prohibition against selling Gazan products in the West Bank and exporting them, except for a few trucks carrying a limited number of goods? And what about imprisoning 2 million people behind barbed wire and military observation and shooting towers? All of these, in your opinion, do not deserve inclusion in the record of collective Jewish disgrace?
Israel never quailed and does not quail now at killing Palestinian civilians – individually, separately, and en masse. But killing Palestinians is not an end in itself. In contrast, Israel’s 70 years of existence prove that the appropriation of Palestinian land is a supreme goal of our state, and that the appropriation comes together with actions to reduce the number of Palestinians on that land.
Expelling Palestinians from their homes, their homeland and their country is a tried-and-true means for diminishing a population in wartime. When that isn’t feasible, concentrating the Palestinians in crowded reservations (on either side of the Green Line) is another method, routine and ongoing. Anyone who found this hard to believe before 1993 received definitive proof in the form of the Oslo Accords: Under the umbrella of the peace process, the main aim of the governments (Labor and Likud) and their bureaucracies was to prove the accusers right, that we are indeed a colonial entity at heart. Does that fill you with pride?
Amira Hass
Haaretz correspondent
Analogies can be fine, but they have to hold water. I've previously given my reasons why I think some main ones you're using don't. And why the way you use them amounts to cherrypicking through history. A valid comparison has to ensure a general comparability of basic facts and socio-historical context, and the Gaza/Warsaw Ghetto one does neither.
There's also an ongoing history to this kind of association, one that I'm sure you're aware of. If you don't think Israel is like the Nazis, as you stated, it's not a very good idea to use one of the preeminent symbols of the Holocaust as a comparison to the Gaza blockade.
You're entitled to your opinion. Absent a deconstruction of the various examples I have given, I myself can't see any issue from a logical perspective, although there could certainly be. Simply calling it "cherry-picking through history" doesn't shine a light on the particular failings of any argument. Granted, from an emotional perspective I could have chosen a less controversial example than the Nazis. In fact in this particular instance, any example of a population misinformed by propaganda would have sufficed.
It didn't register at first when Daniel Pipes used the hashtag #IsraelVictory in Chairman Woodie's post, but I've just noticed that this appears to be a campaign the right are pushing now http://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/israel-victory-gains-strength/
Pretty disturbing really. They are claiming strong support among Israelis for, through military means, achieving a "decisive result" in order to convince Palestinians that they have lost their conflict with Israel and essentially acquiesce in whatever terms Israel chooses. The general feeling seems to be that in previous attacks the IDF has held back and that they need to "let the IDF win". They seem pretty confident that with Trump in office they have a window of opportunity to achieve this.
And here http://www.jewishpress.com/news/bre...ttlements-as-a-roadblock-to-peace/2018/07/03/ a poll claims that "only 3% of Israelis believe that settling in Judea and Samaria is an obstacle to peace." Mental.
Pretty disturbing really. They are claiming strong support among Israelis for, through military means, achieving a "decisive result" in order to convince Palestinians that they have lost their conflict with Israel and essentially acquiesce in whatever terms Israel chooses. The general feeling seems to be that in previous attacks the IDF has held back and that they need to "let the IDF win". They seem pretty confident that with Trump in office they have a window of opportunity to achieve this.
And here http://www.jewishpress.com/news/bre...ttlements-as-a-roadblock-to-peace/2018/07/03/ a poll claims that "only 3% of Israelis believe that settling in Judea and Samaria is an obstacle to peace." Mental.
"Absent a deconstruction"... Several posters have spent quite an amount of time to argue against the ANC comparison in detail. And now you're acting as if nobody has cared to put forward any arguments. Isn't that a tiny bit odd?
I don't feel a deconstruction of the Gaza/Warsaw Ghetto comparison is needed, as it's too grotesque. But it's certainly a perfect example of the agenda-fueled distortion of historical reality I was talking about.
Nope, because only two days ago you stated something very different as your motivation for the comparison:
So, according to your own words, it was indeed your intention to compare the Gaza Strip of today to the Warsaw Ghetto during World War II. Which doesn't stop you from completely contradicting yourself just a few posts later.
Certainly 2cents and PedroMendez made some insightful contributions highlighting certain differences between the ANC and Palestinian factions. 2cents and I had an extended back and forth about it which was a useful exercise I think. But that's not what deconstruction of an argument is. Of course there are differences. Every resistance movement is unique. It doesn't necessarily invalidate the example given as a matter of logic as far as I can tell.
You misunderstand. The motivation for using an example (I'm not sure it was a comparison at all) was to attempt to illustrate a situation where it might be strange (in my opinion) to say you understand another viewpoint. The specific choice of example I chose came down to choosing a situation with some similarities, but as I've subsequently noted, that wasn't really necessary for the purpose of giving an example.
The headline is a bit sensational, but some interesting details on the current negotiations and Yahya Sinwar's role:
Hamas leader rejects deal with Israeli to ease Gaza siege
What is more important to Hamas — the release of its inmates from Israeli jails or improved conditions for Gaza’s 2 million residents? This is not a hypothetical question. It is a real dilemma for the Hamas leadership and the movement’s Gaza chief Yahya Sinwar as they mull over various suggestions to relieve the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip.
London-based Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper reported on June 30 that the Hamas leadership was examining three proposals submitted by different intermediaries. One was conveyed by UN Mideast envoy Nickolay Mladenov, one by an Arab figure described by the paper as having strong links with Hamas and a third through a foreign state also with links to Hamas. The proposals include humanitarian aid and the full opening of crossings to and from the enclave for the passage of goods and persons — in return for the bodies of two Israeli soldiers killed in fighting in Gaza in 2014, Oron Shaul and Hadar Goldin, and of the Israeli civilians believed held by Hamas.
Among the proposals under scrutiny: establishing a joint Israeli-Palestinian industrial zone near the Erez border crossing into Israel, building a floating pier off the island of Cyprus through which goods destined for Gaza would be shipped, and a significant increase in the power supply to the Strip. Other proposals include allowing the entry of fuels into Gaza, easing Egyptian restrictions by establishing an industrial zone near Gaza’s border with Egypt that would provide jobs for the Strip’s residents and permanently opening the Rafah crossing into Egypt for the passage of food, raw material, fuels and more.
Attempts at resolving the Gaza crisis stem from a US effort to resolve the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, in conjunction with the Gulf states, as a preliminary stage for rolling out the Trump administration’s much touted peace plan for the region.
These proposals are the very goals Hamas has been trying to achieve since Israel imposed its blockade on Gaza when Hamas took control of the enclave in 2007. The movement’s leaders were willing to sacrifice thousands of Palestinians in armed clashes with Israel over the past decade for the sake of a significant Israeli easing of its blockade. However, now that various proposals are on the table, the Hamas leadership is rejecting them out of hand. Instead of embracing them, launching intensive negotiations and bargaining for additional Israeli concessions, Hamas refuses to even consider a return of the soldiers’ remains and of the Israeli civilians as part of any deal. It insists that these matters be discussed as part of a separate deal leading to freedom for Palestinian prisoners.
A Palestinian source in the Gaza Strip told Al-Monitor that Sinwar is the main obstacle to an agreement since he insists on an Israeli commitment in advance to a mass Palestinian prisoner release of the magnitude that Hamas achieved in 2011 in return for Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit. Shalit was freed after five years in Hamas captivity in return for 1,027 Palestinians from Israeli jails.
Sinwar was the one who pushed more than any other Gaza leader for reconciliation with Fatah, even at the cost of handing over civilian matters in Gaza to Fatah. He believed that reconciliation was imperative in order to improve conditions in the Strip. But now, faced with proposals to improve Gazans' living conditions, he is unwilling to budge from his pledge to Hamas inmates to obtain their release.
He himself was freed in the Shalit exchange and sees himself as “the father of Palestinian prisoners.” In August 2017, following the resignation of Lior Lotan, the chief Israeli negotiator on the issue of missing and captive Israelis, Sinwar described to journalists in Gaza his determination on the prisoner issue so close to his heart. “The Shalit deal was delayed for two years because the mediators offered us things that did not reach the threshold of [Hamas'] demands," he said. While a prisoner, Sinwar added, he held out for a more “honorable” deal for the release of Palestinian inmates that Israel was nixing.
Given his steadfast position, Sinwar seems willing to forgo concessions for humanitarian relief in Gaza as long as he is not perceived as having violated his pledge to the prisoners held by Israel.
Sinwar served 23 years in an Israeli jail. Ahmed Jabari, the former head of the armed Hamas militia Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, who held Shalit in custody, insisted Sinwar be included in the swap. Jabari was assassinated in 2012. During his lengthy sentence, Sinwar cemented his position as the leader of all Hamas prisoners in Israel. Last year he also underwent brain surgery in Israel to remove a tumor.
Given his experience, Sinwar should be familiar with Israeli society and the country’s political mindset, and with the way Israeli leaders adopt decisions. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman have reiterated time and again that Israel would not free a large number of prisoners, certainly not in return for soldiers’ bodies. Although this was not spelled out, Israel does not see the release of a living Israeli soldier (Shalit) as akin to the freeing of soldiers’ remains. “We cannot afford to repeat the same mistake,” Liberman said in 2017, referring to the Shalit deal.
The Israeli position calls for returning the remains of terrorists it is holding and the Hamas militants it captured in the 2014 war with Gaza in exchange for the bodies of Israel Defense Forces soldiers, and returning sick Palestinian inmates or Palestinians who crossed the border in return for the Israelis being held by Hamas, reportedly people with mental disabilities.
Sinwar probably knows the Israeli leadership will not compromise on the prisoner issue, definitely not when such a deal could be perceived as a despicable trade in bodies. Mladenov and other intermediaries told Hamas as much when they conveyed Israeli messages to Gaza. Sinwar, however, is adamant. He has staked out a stubborn position and refuses to give in, although he probably realizes he doesn’t stand a chance of getting what he wants.
Sinwar amassed political power when he placed the prisoner issue as his top priority. He probably fears losing this political base, as well as the admiration of the prisoners in Israeli jails who are trusting him to get them out and the support of their families in Gaza and the West Bank. With this political consideration in mind, he is willing to sacrifice 2 million Gaza Palestinians yearning for a better life.
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/ori...za-siege-humanitarian-help.html#ixzz5KHfcm3YG
Hamas leader rejects deal with Israeli to ease Gaza siege
What is more important to Hamas — the release of its inmates from Israeli jails or improved conditions for Gaza’s 2 million residents? This is not a hypothetical question. It is a real dilemma for the Hamas leadership and the movement’s Gaza chief Yahya Sinwar as they mull over various suggestions to relieve the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip.
London-based Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper reported on June 30 that the Hamas leadership was examining three proposals submitted by different intermediaries. One was conveyed by UN Mideast envoy Nickolay Mladenov, one by an Arab figure described by the paper as having strong links with Hamas and a third through a foreign state also with links to Hamas. The proposals include humanitarian aid and the full opening of crossings to and from the enclave for the passage of goods and persons — in return for the bodies of two Israeli soldiers killed in fighting in Gaza in 2014, Oron Shaul and Hadar Goldin, and of the Israeli civilians believed held by Hamas.
Among the proposals under scrutiny: establishing a joint Israeli-Palestinian industrial zone near the Erez border crossing into Israel, building a floating pier off the island of Cyprus through which goods destined for Gaza would be shipped, and a significant increase in the power supply to the Strip. Other proposals include allowing the entry of fuels into Gaza, easing Egyptian restrictions by establishing an industrial zone near Gaza’s border with Egypt that would provide jobs for the Strip’s residents and permanently opening the Rafah crossing into Egypt for the passage of food, raw material, fuels and more.
Attempts at resolving the Gaza crisis stem from a US effort to resolve the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, in conjunction with the Gulf states, as a preliminary stage for rolling out the Trump administration’s much touted peace plan for the region.
These proposals are the very goals Hamas has been trying to achieve since Israel imposed its blockade on Gaza when Hamas took control of the enclave in 2007. The movement’s leaders were willing to sacrifice thousands of Palestinians in armed clashes with Israel over the past decade for the sake of a significant Israeli easing of its blockade. However, now that various proposals are on the table, the Hamas leadership is rejecting them out of hand. Instead of embracing them, launching intensive negotiations and bargaining for additional Israeli concessions, Hamas refuses to even consider a return of the soldiers’ remains and of the Israeli civilians as part of any deal. It insists that these matters be discussed as part of a separate deal leading to freedom for Palestinian prisoners.
A Palestinian source in the Gaza Strip told Al-Monitor that Sinwar is the main obstacle to an agreement since he insists on an Israeli commitment in advance to a mass Palestinian prisoner release of the magnitude that Hamas achieved in 2011 in return for Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit. Shalit was freed after five years in Hamas captivity in return for 1,027 Palestinians from Israeli jails.
Sinwar was the one who pushed more than any other Gaza leader for reconciliation with Fatah, even at the cost of handing over civilian matters in Gaza to Fatah. He believed that reconciliation was imperative in order to improve conditions in the Strip. But now, faced with proposals to improve Gazans' living conditions, he is unwilling to budge from his pledge to Hamas inmates to obtain their release.
He himself was freed in the Shalit exchange and sees himself as “the father of Palestinian prisoners.” In August 2017, following the resignation of Lior Lotan, the chief Israeli negotiator on the issue of missing and captive Israelis, Sinwar described to journalists in Gaza his determination on the prisoner issue so close to his heart. “The Shalit deal was delayed for two years because the mediators offered us things that did not reach the threshold of [Hamas'] demands," he said. While a prisoner, Sinwar added, he held out for a more “honorable” deal for the release of Palestinian inmates that Israel was nixing.
Given his steadfast position, Sinwar seems willing to forgo concessions for humanitarian relief in Gaza as long as he is not perceived as having violated his pledge to the prisoners held by Israel.
Sinwar served 23 years in an Israeli jail. Ahmed Jabari, the former head of the armed Hamas militia Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, who held Shalit in custody, insisted Sinwar be included in the swap. Jabari was assassinated in 2012. During his lengthy sentence, Sinwar cemented his position as the leader of all Hamas prisoners in Israel. Last year he also underwent brain surgery in Israel to remove a tumor.
Given his experience, Sinwar should be familiar with Israeli society and the country’s political mindset, and with the way Israeli leaders adopt decisions. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman have reiterated time and again that Israel would not free a large number of prisoners, certainly not in return for soldiers’ bodies. Although this was not spelled out, Israel does not see the release of a living Israeli soldier (Shalit) as akin to the freeing of soldiers’ remains. “We cannot afford to repeat the same mistake,” Liberman said in 2017, referring to the Shalit deal.
The Israeli position calls for returning the remains of terrorists it is holding and the Hamas militants it captured in the 2014 war with Gaza in exchange for the bodies of Israel Defense Forces soldiers, and returning sick Palestinian inmates or Palestinians who crossed the border in return for the Israelis being held by Hamas, reportedly people with mental disabilities.
Sinwar probably knows the Israeli leadership will not compromise on the prisoner issue, definitely not when such a deal could be perceived as a despicable trade in bodies. Mladenov and other intermediaries told Hamas as much when they conveyed Israeli messages to Gaza. Sinwar, however, is adamant. He has staked out a stubborn position and refuses to give in, although he probably realizes he doesn’t stand a chance of getting what he wants.
Sinwar amassed political power when he placed the prisoner issue as his top priority. He probably fears losing this political base, as well as the admiration of the prisoners in Israeli jails who are trusting him to get them out and the support of their families in Gaza and the West Bank. With this political consideration in mind, he is willing to sacrifice 2 million Gaza Palestinians yearning for a better life.
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/ori...za-siege-humanitarian-help.html#ixzz5KHfcm3YG
https://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/1ce1d9b9-6dff-4109-b07c-f3372d21da95?in=12:58:15&out=13:49:12
Interesting UK parliament debate about the Israeli demolition of Khan Al Ahmar
Interesting UK parliament debate about the Israeli demolition of Khan Al Ahmar
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news...lition-of-west-bank-bedouin-village-1.6244135
European Countries Slam Impending Demolition of West Bank Bedouin Village: 'We'll Take Action'
UN Special Coordinator for Mideast Peace Nikolay Mladenov condemns Israel, tweeting that 'actions undermine two-state solution' ■ EU criticizes move, says it 'undermines prospects for lasting peace'
Noa Landau and Yotam Berger 05.07.2018 01:26 Updated: 1:27 AM
European Countries Slam Impending Demolition of West Bank Bedouin Village: 'We'll Take Action'
UN Special Coordinator for Mideast Peace Nikolay Mladenov condemns Israel, tweeting that 'actions undermine two-state solution' ■ EU criticizes move, says it 'undermines prospects for lasting peace'
Noa Landau and Yotam Berger 05.07.2018 01:26 Updated: 1:27 AM
It certainly does invalidate general comparability if the differences lie in fundamentals rather than just some specifics. Which is what the discussion was about all the time, as far as I'm concerned. I don't think the purpose of the counterarguments was to merely have a discoursive exercise, as you present it now, but to substantially challenge the validity of the comparison you made. But that would have to be answered by the other participants themselves.
And for that purpose you innocently chose an example from the Holocaust.
My main point was, and still is, that asserting the Gaza situation and the Warsaw Ghetto bear "some similarities" is a grotesque statement no matter what. The qualitative differences are so drastic that the features you portrayed as comparable have to be emptied of any content and context to be considered similar.
And if we're honest, the core issue is not historical accuracy. The Israel/Nazi association over Gaza is one of the foremost antisemitic tropes of today. To be frank, I can see no variant of that association that doesn't end up in that place.
Given the initial point that the Mandela quote was chosen for, and given the level of detail that was explored in order to attempt to distinguish ANC/Palestinian resort to violence (whether or not that was even relevant is questionable), there is hardly any doubt in my mind that any differences were in the specifics, not the fundamentals.
And now that Israel's favourite card has been played, and for the sake of the thread, I'm going to end my participation in this discussion here.
And I can't imagine how anyone, say, doing a comparative read of the ANC's Freedom Charter of 1955 and the Hamas Covenant of 1988 can come to that conclusion.
It's nothing new that criticism of antisemitic tropes and stereotypes in Israel criticism is perceived as "playing the antisemitism card". To me, the function of that allegation isn't different from that of its twin brother, "playing the race card". But I'm fine with ending it here.
A necessary distortion of the content of the debate which encompassed the history and nature of Palestinian resistance to Zionist colonization long before Hamas existed, as well as the history of resistance of the native people of South Africa to European colonization.
True, the original focus was broader. But Hamas was part of that too, making them a valid example. And our rather long spin-off focused on them all the time, which you didn't seem to have a problem with until now.
But if you insist, you can take the 1968 PLO Charter instead, it works just as well.
Why is the central point of discussion, on comparisons between Israel and Apartheid South Africa, focused on the difference between the ANC charter and Hamas' charter?
When someone makes the comparison between the 2, odds are they are talking about the similarities in disenfranchisement and oppression of a mute minority.
The ANC and Hamas' were/are the forefront of the resistance, but using their shortcomings (of which both have/had many) to justify oppressive regimes isn't the go to.
Ask a lot of South Africans today and they have no hesitation drawing parallels between Apartheid and what's going on in Gaza. They would know.
I think two main aspects of the issue have to be separated: the conditions in the Palestinian territories (West Bank part-occupation, Gaza embargo) on the one side, and aims, ideologies and actions of Palestinian actors (and their supporters) on the other. One can be against the former, while finding much of the latter to be unsupportable. Which is basically my standpoint.
So to address the first part: The conditions under which Palestinians live are absolutely undesirable and the general necessity of an end to Israeli control over these territories is clear to me. The sooner the better, it can't work in any acceptable way. The crux is that it would have to be a resolution that leads to actual peace and mutual recognition. The reasons why I don't think such a resolution is currently realistic, despite being necessary, would be a different discussion.
The other part are the ANC and Palestinian groups as political actors, and there are some key differences I see:
1. The aim of the ANC's struggle was naturally a unified state for all South Africans, while the only feasible resolution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict I can see is a two-state solution. That's an essential difference, especially regarding the relationship to the opponent. Moreover, the explicit or implicit goal of many anti-Israeli actors in the region (including Palestinian ones) is still the "liberation of all of Palestine", i.e. the dismantlement of Israel through what can only be war.
2. The ANC was certainly guilty of terrorism against civilians, but I see a clear difference to the importance massacres had for Arab, Palestinian, and Islamist militants throughout the decades, and the scale as well. For me, this is connected to a difference in basic ideologies and goals. Which is why I don't agree these aspects of anti-Israeli/Jewish militancy are just shortcomings in the same sense as it can maybe be attributed to the South African movement.
3. I'm sure the ANC's ideology never had an equivalent to the antisemitic demonisation of Israelis and Jews that gained in strength in Arab and Islamic societies ever since WW II and Israel's foundation. Despite sometimes overboarding violence, their hostility was primarily directed at the political system. They also never had an equivalent to the religious-fundamentalist ambitions of the Islamists that form the anti-Zionist avant-garde in recent decades.
For these reasons I don't think the movements mentioned are comparable to the anti-apartheid resistance in a meaningful way. The hatred and reactionary ideologies I've seen too often among their supporters (from state officials to random individuals) add to that impression.
So while I probably wouldn't have a substantial problem with the overall comparison if the Palestinian opposition to Israel over the decades had largely resembled the ANC, the fact it didn't - and in which ways - makes it unacceptable to me.
-----
Edit: An improvement of the Gaza situation can likely be achieved on less fundamental terms than the overall problem, of course.
Last edited:
It might work I suppose if Zionist colonisation had begun in 1968 and not at least 80 years previously.
I agree with the first part. I think there are multiple paths to a solution that provides freedom and peace to all inhabitants in Israel and Palestine. It will need compromise from all sides; including the United States. Maybe once we get over our idiotic notion of having to support Israel at all costs because of a silly book... But that's another story.
My problem with the second part of your reply boils down to this. The problematic behaviors or idealogies of the oppressed should have no bearing on how the dominant oppressive power should behave. Differences of idealogies and behaviors between different representative groups of oppressed peoples do not negate comparisons between different oppressors.
If Hamas was replaced by the ANC, or IRA, or FLN in Algeria, would that make the comparison more legitimate? I don't think it does, because that would imply that Hamas and others bring oppression on themselves due to their own behavior, and if they would cease all hostilities and start being nice, then maybe, Israel or Apartheid S.A. or the French occupation or Britain would deem them worthy of the liberties currently denied.
Yes. Hamas are very problematic. Moreso than Mandela's ANC (which by the way, became more radical and violent after the authorities ignored all that moderation and imprisoned Mandela, exiled Tambo, and killed scores more). However there is a positive feedback loop where continued oppression drives more extreme resistance. The pressure valve lied with Apartheid S.A. and lies with Israel.
Doesn't negate the current comparison between Israel and Apartheid South Africa one bit.
I don't get the logic of this, tbh.
The question was if there are fundamental differences between the ANC's approach to national liberation and the general Palestinian one over the decades. (Your point this hasn't been limited to Hamas was certainly correct.)
So surely the stance of each particular actor is what should be looked at and compared, and examples from any point of time are relevant. I'd also say the most recent examples are the most relevant ones politically. So in which way is the overall timeframe of the conflict important for that specific question?
So the Jews really shouldn't be at all concerned about an ideology that really wants to kill Jews for being Jews?
You're insane.
What?
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here.
Israel should take all measures needed to protect life and property of it's citizens, as the rest of the world does. That does not equate to apartheid measures.
And no idea about Israel.
It was a mistake to give him/her the benefit of the doubt and will be a mistake to engage him/her in any kind of meaningful way on this topic.
I think drawing comparisons between the current situation and the Warsaw ghettos are distasteful tbh (though there is of course an element of hindsight bias in play, in the sense that we cannot know how the current situation in the West Bank etc will progress).
Why some people find it so difficult to allow comparisons to other historical situations though I am not sure. Why does the actions of the Palestinian factions change the facts on the ground about how West Ban Palestinians are treated? It is a comparison, an analogy, not an exact situation replicated.
It's not even an analogy. It's a ridiculous distortion of historical fact to slander Israel. If anything, the Warsaw Ghetto is indeed applicable to Israel, in the true sense that once again Jews are surrounded by enemies that want to wipe them out.
Tell me I'm wrong.
I did not make that comparison myself. I don't know enough about the Warsaw ghettos, and I am in no way saying that Israel are committing genocide. But, it is useful to draw parallels between precursors to more horriffic events in history, and current problematic events today. Doing so doesn’t imply that today’s actors (Israel, Trump’s ICE) will eventually commit genocide; it’s just a red flag to the feckedupness of the situation, when others try and normalize said events.
Apologies, only the first line of the post was directed at you specifically, the rest was general musings for the way the thread has gone in general.
I agree with the rest of what you say.
No because engaging with you on this topic in any way is about as fruitful as engaging in this topic with an ant.
I find the comparison between the military superpower in the Middle East, currently occupying another people, to a group of mostly helpless Jews suffering unspeakable atrocities even more distasteful than the one above. But I'm sure you're well aware of that.
But you've got this all inverted. Calling me an ant (which is your best analogy yet) doesn't change the reality that it was the Jews who were supposed to be eliminated in the ME. The fact that this failed to materialise despite several pan-Arab invasions and subsequently left the Palestinian stinking in camps was the Arab's doing. Had King Hussein not succumbed to Nasser's misguided demands, Jordan wouldn't have opened fire on Israel, and Israel wouldn't have had to enter the West Bank (which interestingly, the Palestinians didn't bother claiming with until after the war).
It really is as simple as that.
I love how Christian zionist Ken Meshoe avoids all mention of the West Bank, and then goes on to list all the rights that Mandela fought for, all of which are absent in the West Bank. They also managed to rope his daughter into making one of these ludicrous videos
You're Scottish if I remember correctly and so will know full I didn't call you an ant. You will also know I'm sure that I haven't made any analogies.
Which is part of the reason why there is no point engaging with you.
I'll leave you to carry on posting YouTube videos though.