My bad for bringing up the Religion point several pages ago. Back to Israel-Palestine....
Israeli - Palestinian Conflict
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
OK, if you're happy with this practise that's up to you. I respect the fact decisions are not subject to a democratic vote, but usually there is some attempt at unbiased judgement. I am being threatened with a week's ban following provocation by regular posters and members of the moderation team. I am sure you can see how this doesn't look very good.
Just stick to the main topic of this latest conflict and save the religion bits for their own threads.
I have deleted about 16 posts off topic, just for the record.
The best practice is to heed the advice of moderators and administrators when offered.
I think it the case for people on both sides. Hamas is happy to shoot rockets into Israel and kill a nonzero number of Israelis while watching thousands of their people get slaughtered. Israel is happy to bomb massive amounts of civilians as collective punishment because they value the lives of Palestinians less than their political goals.
Problem on both sides is dehumanizing the other side and letting these bastards control their country. I'm not a pacifist but I have an extremely high threshold for what I would consider a justifiable reason to kill another person, the ultimate attack on their civil rights.
I heard the IDF spokesperson on BBC news hour today say that this is an unprecedented level of accuracy and minimization of civilian deaths. Maybe that is true, I'm not an expert. But taking it at face value, if this is the best that they can do or anyone else has ever done, it's not good enough. The fact that they continue to do it anyway makes them horrible bastards.
Yes, but before that, you were asked to stop, more than once. We don't have the time to placate everyone who gets a bit hysterical.
Hard to argue with that.
Interesting how no one has been able to come up with a viable solution that both sides can live with. Everything I've heard so far has been a delusional laundry list of Hamas' demands. Anyone ?
Yes, you'd have thought humanity would have learned a thing or two after 1945.
Israel is going to have to make some serious compromises whatever the solution.
Actually they both are.
A single, federated, secular state where Jews and Palestinians have equal rights under the law as Israeli citizens? I'm crazy, I know.
Hamas is the other belligerent here. In order for there to be a lasting peace, both sides are going to have to capitulate to a demand or two from the other. For Hamas it may be a piecemeal solution of opening a crossing ("liberating the rest of Palestine" can come later). For Israel it may be a solid assurance that no more rockets will be shot into Israel, neither by Hamas nor any of the other militant groups inside Gaza. The Egyptians, who are now hostile to Hamas, will need to be party to the negotiations, as will an outside body like the EU or the like.
That's the ideal solution but I think it's a tad unlikely really. A two state solution seems the most realistic compromise, however imperfect.
I think Hamas can be made irrelevant by Israel if they really want peace.
That's a risky gamble for the Israelis to entertain. They hold the power in this dispute, and will require significant assurances that they will get something tangible out of a potential resolution.
Hamas are nutters, I would say they are incapable of compromise. Israel hold all the cards, and with some human rights concessions could really screw up Hamas' hold on the people. People with children will accept an olive branch, Hamas should be removed from the equation, and Israel has to stop the basic infringemnt of human rights that occur with shocking regularity.
Considering the superior power in every aspect, it's not that risky, and as I say if they really want peace, maybe a risk is necessary.
That would be ideal.
Both sides must want peace.
Well the problem is that Israeli's have become risk adverse. Perhaps forever.
From their perspective (this forum aside), Oslo blew up in their face, and the Gaza withdrawal didn't bring anything joyful.
I think the Palestinian people will want peace. Hamas won't, so they need to be ignored. With or without Hamas Israel hold all the cards in my opinion. They are the only ones with the means to make any concessions if there is a ceasefire. Equal rights is what I mean, and the fact that is a 'concession' shows how wrong it is.
I agree. Israel is giving Hamas all the ammunition it needs for propaganda at the moment. To get rid of Hamas, Israel needs to somehow convince the people of Gaza that Hamas is the real problem. It can't do this when it keeps dropping bombs on hospitals and schools. To be honest I think it's going to be difficult for them to do when they were occupying Gaza long before Hamas existed.
Agree, but like I said, I think it's very possible if the motivation is there.
This is what I mean when I say Israel needs to make compromises. It is going to have to take a few risks and take the dominant role in peace (as it has done in war).
Hamas, however authoritarian, are an elected organization so that's not likely to happen.
There's nothing the Palestinians can possibly give them, other than a recognition of their state. The problem is that Israel require that as a prerequisite for talks, which is a ridiculous thing to ask of a people they have under the thumb.
I'm not so sure. They are elected alright, but almost entirely to fight Israel and stop what they see as slow genocide. If that stops they are largely a governing party with no mandate.
The thing is, even the UN agree with a lot of the premises of Hamas' demands. It's their methods that are reprehensible.
Palestinians are denied basic human rights, that these are classed as demands at all is criminal.
The UN are constrained by the security council, so in the absence of unanimity, which there rarely is, they aren't empowered to do anything and are basically rendered irrelevant. Any solution has to involve all parties involved from the US, Israelis, both Palestinian factions, Egypt, and the EU. That's the only way all sides will be able to communicate a deal.
Yeah, that's not the point I'm making. I know the UN are toothless. I was just trying to say that any proferred 'solution' will seem to have a Hamas bias as they represent the disenfranchised.
Didn't Tom Clancy come up with a solution involving Swiss Guards and some other shit?
Isn't that exactly what i asked if you could come up with?
By contrast, throughout the Mandatory period, Arab immigration was unrestricted. In 1930, the Hope Simpson Commission, sent from London to investigate the 1929 Arab riots, said the British practice of ignoring the uncontrolled illegal Arab immigration from Egypt, Transjordan and Syria had the effect of displacing the prospective Jewish immigrants. 8
The British Governor of the Sinai from 1922–36 observed: “This illegal immigration was not only going on from the Sinai, but also from Transjordan and Syria, and it is very difficult to make a case out for the misery of the Arabs if at the same time their compatriots from adjoining states could not be kept from going in to share that misery.” 9
The Peel Commission reported in 1937 that the “shortfall of land is . . . due less to the amount of land acquired by Jews than to the increase in the Arab population.” 10
[URL='http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths3/MFmandate.html#_ednref8']8 John Hope Simpson, Palestine: Report on Immigration, Land Settlement and Development, (London, 1930), p. 126.
9 C. S. Jarvis, “Palestine,” United Empire (London), Vol 28 (1937), p. 633.
10 Palestine Royal Commission Report, p. 242.[/URL]
I think this comment from a Northen Ireland newspaper article on the conflict makes us all look quite rational, so I'll post it.
Muslims slit the throats of animals whilst they are fully conscious letting them die writhing in agony.
Jews also slit the throats of animals whilst fully conscious letting them die writhing in agony.
To paraphrase the NSPCC Cruelty to animals must stop. Full Stop.
Up the ALF!
Jews also slit the throats of animals whilst fully conscious letting them die writhing in agony.
To paraphrase the NSPCC Cruelty to animals must stop. Full Stop.
Up the ALF!
I'll make it as simple as possible for you - literally anything that aims to avoid the slaughter of innocents.
I'll have some of the stuff you just smoked.
Alright, but no Bogarting.
I'm afraid that is still saying what not to do.