And what makes you certain that this new proposal of yours would cease Palestinian inclination towards radicalisation? Because to me it sounds like this 'compromise' of sorts would lead to an even shittier situation for the Palestinians, who would find themselves only further disenfranchised.
Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
Miles away. You need at least two armies for large scale war.
Military pressence in the region, a counter-weight to Iran and Russia in what Kissinger believed was the key region of the world, a sophisticated intelligence network, landing areas and refilling areas for warplanes, close proximity to the Suez canal should Egypt do something crazy, domestic support from the christian and jewish electorate in the US, domestic clout with no risk, a voice in regional affairs. Take your pick.
Jordan has nothing to gain from tracts of their land being given to the Palestinians or millions of Palestinians being given Jordanian citizenship. They already have over 3 million Palestinians in their country. Egypt doesn't really care about Iran anywhere near as much as its Gulf neighbours do. Saudi may certainly benefit from a civilian nuclear power programme and more weapons from the Americans.
My point isn't that those countries don't have things to gain by normalising relations with Israel/ being closer. My contention is with the fact the Israelis can be constrained by such an agreement. They are the regional hegemon, backed almost always unequivocally by the world's sole hegemon. They can do as they wish with little consequence and will continue to do so. You think if a deal was signed between Saudi and Israel (which gave Saudi more weapons and a nuclear programme) and the USA and then Israel built more settlements, the Saudis would actually put that at risk? Nobody powerful or important (sadly) actually cares about the Palestinians. That doesn't incentivise Israel to accomodate at all.
Said for years (in jest) we should give the Jews a low populated Canadian region and let them feck off there. Would happily give the same to the Palestinians instead. Not that I own Canada!
You and @africanspur should listen to that podcast I posted. It's really good and detailed [and grim]
If their life improves, in addition to some heavy international presence (see Kosovo), it probably would work.
I do not think it is gonna happen, but I think at this stage that is the best thing Palestinians can get right now. Unless a new WW happens, they are not gonna get more.
That’s not quite right, the status of Jerusalem as a whole is supposed to be resolved through final negotiations, by which it would presumably either be partitioned (again) or shared in some way. Hence the reluctance countries have shown to having their embassies to Israel in West Jerusalem.
This I agree with. Also the other key players in the region are huge allies directly, or by association, of the US. A lot of references are made to WW2, the most important one for me is for any solution to be made is that US simply has to change their role from being no.1 ally to the already military superior part, to the key mediator.
Israel is key to Arab disunity. Arab disunity has always been important. The international community just looks at the backing Israel gets and realises shutting up is in their own best interests.
I know the Irish government has never echoed the sentiments of its people on Israel.
But would that ever be a possibility? Like in reality, we just give them the a space and they get to live democratically?
White phosphorous gas being used is a war crime and an act against humanity. Governments should round on Netanyahu to withdraw his plan all day today because the long term civilian effect not just in deaths but displacement is going to be felt for generations to come. Egypt could have opened its border sooner and the fact they didn't is shocking but 24 hours is a threat not a warning.
What I want to add though is accounts that some users are posting like that lowkey rapper come across quite hypocritical. That guy among several others I see didn't have anything to say about white phosphorous gas being used by Russia in Ukraine and on the contrary pretty well defended and/or turned a blind eye this entire year and a half to the actions of Russia in Ukraine. Similarly there are viral videos being posted to show Israeli war crimes in Gaza which are actually from Russian war crimes in Ukraine which the people now sharing had nothing to say at the time at best or justified at worst. Social media disinformation and hypocrisy isn't a one way street.
What I want to add though is accounts that some users are posting like that lowkey rapper come across quite hypocritical. That guy among several others I see didn't have anything to say about white phosphorous gas being used by Russia in Ukraine and on the contrary pretty well defended and/or turned a blind eye this entire year and a half to the actions of Russia in Ukraine. Similarly there are viral videos being posted to show Israeli war crimes in Gaza which are actually from Russian war crimes in Ukraine which the people now sharing had nothing to say at the time at best or justified at worst. Social media disinformation and hypocrisy isn't a one way street.
The one about dealing with trauma you mean? I imagine I will try to disengage soon from the thread and the news for a bit, its incredibly depressing and I am struggling. And the worse is yet to come I'm sure.
Afghanistan army wasn't particularly big or dangerous. Closer than people think I think.
Doubt it. Just a pipe dream fantasy for tired people like me and you. They want "their" ancestral lands, and their archeology and landmarks etc. If I was king of either population and could magically move all the infrastructure? Sure, I'd move in a heartbeat.
Nono, it's a podcast called 'Rational Security' which discusses the conflict and legal implications here: https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/rational-security/id956270301 or https://www.lawfaremedia.org/podcas...y-the-israel-and-hamas-at-war-special-edition
They even talk about the misinformation problems.
I'm trying to disengage a bit here because the misinformation is just almost every post now and I'm looking bitter and dogmatic to people. Probably need to get myself off work and outside over the weekend. I want to make a distillery visit.
edit: At around 1 hour and 9 minutes, they discuss whether the attack was an inevitability of Israeli oppression.
Last edited:
It would be a possibility if they had power or the rest of the world had the will.
There are lots of really interesting pre-Israel books about a Jewish homeland. Lots accepted the current situation would be no non runner be because it would just be a hostile militarised state (the Iron Wall) and looked at other possible locations.
And why would all these benefits be gone if the US decides to actually hold Israel to account over their crimes? Israel depends more on the US than vice versa, they'll play ball of the Americans force them to. And regimes like Iran and their proxies are only bolstered by Israel's endeavours in the region. Not sure why Russia are relevant considering they've always maintained cordial, if not neutral relations with Israel.
Which period? In the 80s it was a proxy Cold War.
Islamic countries have been bordered by a state run by a blood thirsty mass murdering zionist war criminals for years, determined not just to eradicate the indigenous population but to completely remove any sense of a nation / people called palestine even existing.
Good post.
Post 9/11
There's the infrastructure problem too now. It'd have been possible in the 40's, not today unfortunately. I'd think I'd pick Vermont or Montana for my state; beautiful!
Fair, perhaps I'm being a little sloppy by conflating the pre-67 agreement with what's currently on deck, but my original point still stands. Its wrong to simply pretend there's no consensus over what is considered Palestinian territory.
OMG, I can not believe people have difficulty understanding what ending occupation mean? You either know nothing about the conflict or are not old enough. Retreat to the borders according to the 242 UN resolution in 1967 and the 2334 UN resolution 2016.
You are only one fecking click google search away from understanding what international law say about it.
Yes, let's give Hamas nukes.
There is a huge difference between a war and world war, which is what the post was asking. For it to become a world war you would probably have to see Iran stepping in, US getting involved, China and Russia picking a side, etc.
We're nowhere close.
You might not care, but what are you trying to achieve with your contribution to this thread? Posts like these (and several you have made before in this thread) serves no other purpose than to disrupt discussion and create a hostile environment.
Yes I agree. If I appear pedantic about it it’s because I’m vehemently opposed to Jerusalem being partitioned again. J’lem should remain as one and open to all.
The actual details would have to be hammered out between them, but I don't think you can achieve anything without more involvement at this point. Jordan, Egypt and the Saudis all need to be involved IMO. One alone isn't enough, and both Saudi and Jordan can provide the authority to lower tensions between jews and muslims. What each state should get in return will be a point of negotation - there obviously has to be a balance here that makes it economically or politically painful for Isreal to violate an agreement. States need to be made to care about the palestinians, and for that to happen there needs to be a clear incentive for them to care. Isreal need to care more about their position in the region, their economic prosperity and security situation in relation to Iran and others than placating the political right in their country. The same has to be the case for the three others, and really the US as well (although that is much harder). How to do that is the big question, but one I think it's worth asking.
a hostile environment? im actually being serious about arming the palestinians properly - just as the Israelis allow the settlers to be armed to the teeth and operate oustide the norms.
theres a lot of not just gas lighting the palestinians as somehow being responsible for their predicament (as victims of war crimes) but also for being resistant to a solution, which looking at posts above seems to be them basically abandoning their lands.
ill quite happily disrupt that discussion...
An American president that went against Isreal would not win reelection - it's a political death sentence. It's also their longest standing ally in the region by far. That means that US officials will use private channels for a long time before they even think of going publicly with a concern. It doesn't matter what causes the issues with Iran, what matters is that it's there. Russia and China are rivals of the US, anything the US does - anywhere in the world - will take them into consideration. The fact that Isreal has cordial relations with Russia makes it more important for the US to be on their good side.
1. i never mentioned Hamas, so please stop conflating them with the palestinians, the other way around and id be accused of anti-semitism
2. Israel wont even admit to having nukes so it doesnt have to sign up to any relevant treaties.
What you are advocating for is WW3, hardly the way forward, don't you think? Every now and then you come into this thread to post similar stuff. Also who is saying Palestinians in general are responsible for this situation? And you know very well that the consensus in this discussion is not what you are illustrating.
Unfortunately probably not too far off; the aftermath of WW1 led (albeit indirectly) to conditions that enabled WW2 and conditions at the end of that war, in this case carving up the middle east, may well lead to WW3.
The irony is that in all three cases the 'conditions' were the (well meaning if not well thought out) attempts to create peace and stability after the turmoils of war, but that went terribly wrong as events played out thereafter.
A sort of Deja vu... all over again!
Some of what Hamas has done has been debunked already - and this isn't to minimise the atrocities that they have done, but I think it's important to be clear about what they have done as opposed to what comes through unverifiable or unsubstantiated sources. Another poster posted about Atrocity Propaganda - something that's been fairly central to this recent round of conflict. Whether they're living in tunnels or not - again I don't know, it's plausible, but it could also be bollocks. My overriding point is we can't punish Palestinians because of Hamas. By all means, punish Hamas, but why punish innocent Palestinians? This is why there needs to be international intervention. The Israelis will reduce Gaza to nothing but rubble.
And the other thing is - Israel does the same thing as Hamas. They torture, they kill wantonly, kids, women - all the same things Hamas do.
What an oddly framed post.
As if Hamas were a weather phenomenon.
Israel doesn't pay that price for being where it is, it pays it for doing what it does.
yet here we are, we cant have the Palestinians properly armed. absolutely no option for their self-determination. thats the colonialist mindset right there.
For the Middle East to be carved up, there has to be an interest for it to happen. Neither the powerful regional actors (apart from maybe Iran, and I also find that unlikely), nor the global superpowers, seems to have any interest in risking anything like that.
Well the difference is that Palestine doesn’t have a sovereign state to lean back to.
If they are recognised, boundaries set and military presence like Kosovo example above it’s at least a starting point.
otherwise as your example Israel will just keep peeling off territories as they are in position of power.