I tried reporting one of the posts that says ethnic cleansing is a good solution to the problem. Didn't help.
Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
I don't buy this "Israel won't listen to any country even the US' It's very easy to get Israel to listen, treat them like any other rogue state, sanctions is a good place to start. That will bring them to the table, dismantle the settlements, create a demilitarised Palestinian state with UN peacekeepers, Israelis are great at building walls I'm sure they can secure their borders.
Exactly. And that point isn't about Israel but the bystanders who for some reason claim that one side has the right to defend itself while the other presumably doesn't have that right. One side also has the right to abuse the other knowing that two things will happen simultaneously they won't be condemned and the other side will be condemned if they react violently.
People are right when they say that Israel has a right to defend itself, they are also right to say that any violence from palestinians is wrong. The issue is that we forget to also say that palestinians have a right to defend themselves and that Israel is wrong for using violence and oppression.
Bingo. Like most threads in the CE forum.
Absolutely it's a disgrace the way Israel have been allowed to treat these people for decades and most western countries are complicit with it. The completely different narratives from western governments and media surrounding what are essentially similar injustices re: Russia>Ukraine and Israel>Palestine is laughably hypocritical.
You speak like Arabs/Muslims don't have a different narrative because it's Israel.
Waiting for @owlo to chime in with 'but it's better for them to leave their home and land because you can't expect Israeli settlers, who have no agency in the situation, to stop!'.
As a westerner I'm commenting on the hypocrisy of Western Govenrments and Media and how we are complicit with Israels brutal treatment and oppression of the Palestinina people.
Not sure what that has to do with Arab/Muslim narratives I'm not exposed to nor even referenced. Though I've no doubt you'd like to edify me with some of these narratives and how they somehow justify Israels behaviour?
The bastard Israeli Govt and their terror squad have now killed 10,000+ in their genocide so far.
There is likely many hundreds buried under the destroyed buildings.
There is likely many hundreds buried under the destroyed buildings.
Of course its possible. To suggest otherwise ironically insinuates the anti-semitic claim of Jews holding some sort of excessive power over the world where not even the word's biggest superpower can exercise their own agency over an ally that depends on them.
Its an excuse used to try and absolve the US in their culpability in this catastrophe. The fact is they're not holding the Israelis to account isn't because of fear of upsetting the wacko Christion Zionist base who are hoping it speeds up the rapture, but rather because they don't want to weaken what's essentially a regional outpost for them. The human cost is completely irrelevant, half a million Iraqis was a palatable price for them to pay to exert some regional hegemony, so what's a few dozen thousand dead Palestinians?
You can argue about the power of lobbying, AIPAC and what not, but ultimately the US does have both the choice and power to bring this to heel. It just chooses not to because of its own regional interests.
There is a lot to get angry/frustrated about in his posting…. but I don’t think I’ve seen him defend settler terrorism.
Absolutely, it's a geo political position the US has taken. There are various ways the conflict can be solved.
I guess this could be looked at through the lens of normalization in the wider region which was bringing new diplomatic ties and huge economic growth away from traditional O&G. Whilst the Palestinian people were undoubtedly suffering - an increasing and utterly disregarded issue under the current IL government - the wider region was modernizing and uniting. With the potential of Saudi joining the Accords (publicly, they've been working with Israel for years behind the scenes), those societies and groups who saw themselves falling behind and becoming increasingly overlooked decided to act.
Regarding the Westernized parts of Gaza's economy, as you said, I'd take it all with a pinch of salt whilst Hamas are in power personally, but hopefully it'll offer the society there a chance to engage with the wider world and provide a platform for self-determination in the future.
Its not so much defending them, but rather accepting that settlers are going to do their thing and its horrible and how we're seemingly powerless to do anything about it. The issue is both downplaying it as a cause for Palestinian radicalisation and an obstacle to peace, and also pretending that both Israel and its allies are powerless to stop it so we would just accept it. I think the sheer trivialisation of settler terrorism to be not only ignorant, but frankly dangerous and counter-intuitive to any roadmap towards peace. If the Israelis and the US are serious about lasting peace in the region, it needs to come down hard on these settlers, simple as that. They're not a 'nuisance', they're a dangerous problem.
Just so I don't risk misinterpreting, could you expand on this please?
As a Westerner, why does this conflict concern you more than many others around the world, many by other US allies? Are you simply ignorant of them? What specifically attracts you to this conflict, or makes you think that prior to 10/7, the Palestinians were suffering particularly badly?
And there's no justification for the brutality of their response. I've said that over and over.
The only thing I've said about the west bank settlers is they are terrorists encouraged by terrorist ministers, and the army should be shooting them not protecting them if they try their terrorist shit. That and asking where the hell the police are. Gaza is a war in response to an act of war; the settler situation is entirely different and simply criminal.
No it's not. Russia is attacking a European state and threatening a number of nearby NATO countries. Western borders are under direct threat. Those governments have a direct interest in the stability of states on their borders and in deterring Russia. Western force can conceivably solve this problem.
This is not the same thing as what is happening in the Middle East - an intractable, generations long problem, that cannot be solved by Western force. We (and by we I mean the US) can only broker an agreement, and only then, if both sides really want one enough. And that has never been the case.
And I commend you for those sentiments, but I don't think its appropriate to treat it as problem that's parallel to what's currently happening. The mistake we're making is analysing this recent conflict in a vacuum, a mistake we made during the war on terror. Instead we should be treating settler terrorism as an inflammatory issue that's empowered the likes of Hamas.
Again, follow the logic through: October 7th was justifiable because Hamas - who is the government of Gaza - felt conditions were such that seeking aid, seeking support from fellow states and so forth wasn't working. That' what you're saying. It was so desperate there, that of course they organised and carried out a mass murder and torture of cilivians. Who wouldn't in such situation?
Well the answer should be: everyone. Because here's what happens:
1. Gazan conditions are such that Hamas feels the attacks are justified in order to...something. Get everyone to look at Gaza I guess.
2. Hamas KNEW that Israel, and Netanyahu in particular, would absolutely respond, and respond in a way that would devestate Gaza.
3. Said response would ensure life for Gazans is categorically WORSE than on October 6th
4. So Hamas leadership made the calculation: better to do something, get the world watching and f*ck the consequences than continue with the status quo
Well here you go. Status quo is well and truly f*cked. Please list for me who is better off now.
You are not following the logic, you are reiterating the logic that I questioned. Western media and government consider that Israel's response is justified and that Israel has a right to defend itself. The issue with that viewpoint is that should apply to palestinians, but doesn't. So what are the options for palestinians when it comes to defending themselves?
I think that the Abraham Accords - and the new diplomatic ties and economic diversifications that came with it - was seen as a threat to those who weren't included. With Saudi Arabia in particular having been close to joining, the power shift in the ME would have been huge. It would have separated Iran even further, and I think that's one of the main reasons why Hamas were presumably given the all clear to act when they did.
Well, that's not what the answer is in the world we live in.
I agree with you, but when I say 'it is what it is' - I mean the Israeli state are locked into a response because of the success of 10/7. Regardless of the root causes, that's how they were always going to respond to an attack of that magnitude. (And see above; I've said there's no justification for the brutality of it) - So essentially it's two things: One is an event a state is locked into, forced into by an external factor (That they were largely/partly to blame for that external factor is irrelevant to the fact that it's simply their response, and there's no stopping it. The other is low level terrorism encouraged by a cadre of far right extremists that the moronic prime minister invited into government so he could cling to power. There's no military justification for it, its terrorism for the sake of being assholes and trying to scare them off their land. As far as I'm concerned, if the Palestinians shot them for it, good riddance. (Not actually, because the army would then murder them but you see what I mean.) - In the past before these lunatics were in the government, the police would have prevented this most of the time.
So yes, although the settler terrorism is causation for palestinian terrorism, it's a mistake to lump the response [to something which was beyond the pale and could only really elicit that response if you know anything about israel] to terrorist settlers who are having their jollies terrorising innocents and have been for years. Settlers are a divisive issue. This was in 2016, but I doubt so much has changed.
If you asked about settlers who are terrorising others, I'm sure it'd be even more divisive. Though the right and religious right are gaining ground there. If you asked about Israeli support for this Gaza invasion, it's probably at about 90%+ and even 60%+ in the Bedouin etc communities.
I don’t buy this idea that the U.S doesn’t have significant influence when it comes to Israel.
If the will was there, the U.S and its Western allies could withdraw all aid and funding to Israel, as well as impose sanctions. They just don’t want to. The idea that it’s impossible though is clearly rubbish. They just don’t have the will to do it.
If the will was there, the U.S and its Western allies could withdraw all aid and funding to Israel, as well as impose sanctions. They just don’t want to. The idea that it’s impossible though is clearly rubbish. They just don’t have the will to do it.
https://www.zeit.de/politik/ausland/2023-11/israel-westjordanland-ard-team-soldaten-bedroht
The IDF has apparently threatened a team of ARD journalists (German equivalent of the BBC). Due to this, the German government demands that Israel protects freedom of press. The team was reporting on settler violence and the responsible soldiers are apparently settlers themselves, or at least some of them. They allegedly asked the reporters wether they were Jewish and insulted a member of their team as a traitor. The news team also claims that this was the second incident of this kind.
The IDF has apparently threatened a team of ARD journalists (German equivalent of the BBC). Due to this, the German government demands that Israel protects freedom of press. The team was reporting on settler violence and the responsible soldiers are apparently settlers themselves, or at least some of them. They allegedly asked the reporters wether they were Jewish and insulted a member of their team as a traitor. The news team also claims that this was the second incident of this kind.
They have a right to resist. Just like the Indians, Aborigines, and every other native people that were displaced and oppressed. (Though 10/7 was not resistance) - Unfortunately the way the world works, is if you're the weaker party you're simply a terrorist and you'll get crushed 99% of the time. So it's often smarter not to resist so your conditions are improved by the oppressor. If their resistance is harming their own people more than the enemy, it's not smart.
It's why oppressors are so brutal towards resistance. The likes of Iran, DPRK, Lukashenko, Assad, the USA, Spain. The aim is to make it so hopeless that peoples spirits are completely crushed or they leave. That I believe was Jabotinskys plan for the Palestinians.
It's also why I think the situation is now hopeless.
They're both situations where a global power with a powerful military is attacking a much less powerful neighbour and killing thousands of civilians in the process.
Good. Give them hell. Transparency from good journalists is good. (Give the IDF hell before anybody starts.)
What business is that of yours?
What makes you think I'm ignorant of any other conflicts?
Are you trying to say they were not being treated appalingly before the 7th of October?
Great
Ps. When I say that they have a right to resist, I specifically mean against military targets. Not bombing immigrant teenagers in nightclubs, beheading babies, shooting teenagers and dogs, and shooting up music festivals.
I see. So the people killed and injured in the West Bank in 2023 before October resisted too much and the conditions of life in the West Bank are improved by the oppressor.
Looking for logic from a poster who recommended ethnic cleansing of Palestinians as a harsh but necessary solution for everlasting peace
If Israel has the right to defend itself and as a result is allowed to kill innocent civilians, do the Palestinian people have the right to kill innocent civilians as part of their right to resist?
You've talked a lot about there being no other option for Israel and therefore the bombing of gaza and as a result the death of civilians being the only one available to them. Flipping that around, what option do the Palestinian people in gaza have? as to me the have no options. Therefore would you be comfortable with them killing Israeli citizens as part of their strategy of right to resist.
It's funny that people were concern trolling the left about Hamas not liking any of their values.
Meanwhile Israel twitter account is promoting a video where half of the point is "supporting Palestinians huh... GAY MUCH?!?"
How is this meant to keep Jews safe?
You are creating more radicals.
You are creating more radicals.
I was hoping for the opposite conclusion. I hoped that someone would suggest that palestinians should choose peace at all cost and that violence was always the wrong option.
IDF or Netanyahu don't really have that on their agenda.