This thread is a fair indication of this sad truth. There are pro-Palestinians posters here who understand that utopian liberal ideas aside, a two-state solution based on two independent nation states is the only chance for stability. However, whenever shit hits the fan they close ranks with the most bigoted, infantile posters proposing the elimination of the Jewish state while calling it Nazi. Absolute madness.
Israeli - Palestinian Conflict
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
This thread is a fair indication of this sad truth. There are pro-Palestinians posters here who understand that utopian liberal ideas aside, a two-state solution based on two independent nation states is the only chance for stability. However, whenever shit hits the fan they close ranks with the most bigoted, infantile posters proposing the elimination of the Jewish state while calling it Nazi. Absolute madness.
Yep we are going to disagree on this subject.
It's frightening. And it's really really tragic that a people who were subjected to the horrors of the holocaust are now being demonised with the label "Nazi", a term which still evokes an emotional hatred in those in the west, given the history. Upside down, utter lunacy.
It's therapy.
Imagine how cathartic it feels to the guilt-laden Europeans to accuse the Jews of committing genocide.
Wow lads. Firstly, why would anyone born after 1935 feel any guilt? Really?
Secondly, the use of language is frightening, lunacy and madness? Frightening? In the context of over 1000 civilian deaths?
While the word Nazi is uncalled for and lazy, it's not apropos of nothing. Would apartheid insult your sensibilities less? The point is the same, just less directly emotive. But really are you willing to rationalise the death of children on one hand and call the use of language 'lunacy'? There are some wild double standards there.
The world is gradually uniting in comdemning Isreal, so maybe it is those defending the death of chlidren that are closing ranks.
Why on earth would any of us feel guilty? We weren't fecking there
There are pan global demonstrations, 'guilt' is a pretty wild reasoning for this. It may just be outrage at what is actually occurring?
Really? as do the people who tirelessly campaign for a free Tibet wanting the complete destruction of China.
feck me, you must be a comedian. That is an insult to the millions that stood up and fought against Nazi Germany.
Unlike you, were busy defending the life of children. Our children. If you are interested in defending Gazan children from their elected governing gangs you could organize a UN peace-keeping force that will disarm Hamas. Unitll then, we don't really give a toss about condemnations in Europe in general, and Ireland in particular.
None of that explains the double moral standards. Defending the murder of children and being shocked by name calling.
It's painfully obvious you don't care about the whole world condemning you. So we now you don't like the word Nazi, but like I asked, hoe does apartheid sit with you?
As for Ireland, I'm not sure what we ever did to you. But that said, it's like a badge of honor to be signled out for your disdain.
Would they have still campaigned for a free Tibet if Tibetans were pursuing the destruction of China?
Or maybe he is interested on defending children but disagrees with you on how that would best be accomplished. What you three keep doing is to blow comments way out of proportion in order to accuse people of some rather ghastly things. Hardly makes this thread conducive to reasonable discussion.
Wild reasoning??? The benefits are huge.
1. European nations can appease their growing Muslim populations without guilt.
2. European legacy of anti-Semitism, which has never really died, can persist without guilt.
3. ME nations, forever bent on Israel's destruction, can pursue their agenda without condemnation
If Israel can be pushed into a corner where it must use vigorous means to defend itself or else face the methodical slaughter of its civilians (and not since the Nazis themselves has the slaughter of Jewish civilians been so methodical!), then the world can look at Israel and say: the Jews are no better than we are/were ! The Jews are acting like Nazis!
Ireland has traditionally been the most hostile country in Europe towards the state of Israel. However, I'm sure there are pro-Israeli Irish people too so I don't have anything againsy "you" in that sense. At these challenging times we'll have to settle for the support we get in the US, UK, Germany, Canada, among other Western nations.
As for you as an individual, i don't give a toss whether you call Israel Nazi or apartheid. We're doing well despite the bias, hostility and double standards. We've had it far worse before, we'll handle that too.
The discussion here has been great, to the extent that I come here for updates, instead of checking the news.
Equally stupid.
He's more than welcome to pick his tactics when he defends his children. As is plain to see even here, our rivals want us gone. It's becoming tiresome having to justify my tactic in making sure they are not successful.
If you go back a page you'll find that we were on the verge of a constructive conversation here. Unfortunately, when we're accused of being a blood-thirsty, apartheid, Nazi, rocket-intercepting disproportionate bunch the thread is derailed.
Ok, but why? I would genuinely like something constructive from you on this discussion instead of exaggeration, hyperbole and glib dismissals. There is segregation, denial of human rights. This is what wiki says of apartheid.
"Apartheid (Afrikaans pronunciation: [ɐˈpartɦɛit]; an Afrikaans[1] word meaning "the state of being apart", literally "apart-hood")[2][3] was a system of racial segregation in South Africa enforced through legislation by the National Party (NP) governments, the ruling party from 1948 to 1994, under which the rights, associations, and movements of the majority black inhabitants were curtailed and Afrikanerminority rule was maintained."
It seems to apply?
And we are accused of having thinly veiled hopes of genocide, which you yourself contribute to in this very post with "want us gone".
Your rivals want you gone, yes, Hamas have said that. I want the capitalist system to be dismantled and replaced with a yet to be found socialism. I also have many other fantasies, none of which are achievable or require bombing of children in my vicinity.
"We"? There are enough posters who have made public they desire to see the end of Israel. Whether you side with them or not I don't know. I don't keep a dossier of each and every poster here.
I'm going to retire from this thread I think. The whole situation is a saddening clusterfeck which saps you out.
I'm just going to focus my energy on Iraq and pray (secularly) that the violence here alleviates on all sides. Peace/Shalom/Salam.
I'm just going to focus my energy on Iraq and pray (secularly) that the violence here alleviates on all sides. Peace/Shalom/Salam.
I think/hope this is a honest mistake on your part. Olmert realignment plan was a unilateral withdrawal from the WB, along the lines of the previous Gaza withdrawal. If 30-40% did not oppose that outrageous suggestion you could imagine the support a true peace plan would recieve here.
I don't know the source of the figures you are posting here, but Israel has set many precedents in the history of mankind, and a democratic decision will see the vast majority of settlers relocating peacefully to Israelן territory within agreed borders. I wouldn't mind if the rest agreed to remain in their settlements under Palestinian rule if they wished to. I'm sure neither would the peace-seeking Palestinians.
I think that you'll find that most settlement construction in the WB is within the main chunks of territory Olmert suggested would be annexed by Israel anyway. As I said, other settlemnts would have to be evacuated. You could see construction there as a platform for housing Palestinian refugees.
How's that for a deal? Jewish state in pre-1967 borders on one side, and modern housing for Palestinians?
I am confused. Did you support Olmert´s plan?
what numbers do you mean? the ones about the polls or the ones about the relocation of settlers?
in 2006 about 250k settlers were living in the westbank and about 170-180k settlers would have lived in the territory that Olmert would have claimed. (I exclueded east jerusalem to simplify the discussion) The differential would have had to be relocated. Nowadays the settlements expanded and logically you need to relocate more people. We can surely argue about the exact number, if thats what its all about? Any reasonable number (something between 100k and 180k) would have the exact same implication: irreversible.
My personal option (in short) would have been somewhat similar to Olmert´s idea. Swap some land, so a palestinian cohesive state can exist and the big settlement complexes become part of israel. Both countries have to accept minorities and guarantee their safety. A mixed inernational security force would have had to assure Israel´s safety for the first years. Additionally both governments would have had to obligate themselves to a process of reconciliation with active emphasis to promote cooperation between the civil societies of both countries.
Today a cohesive Palestinian territory doesnt exist anymore. Just look at the (already outdated) map, that I posted before. The palestinians will never accept a peace-plan where they dont end up with a cohesive territory and Israel wont be willing to give up enough land to make this possible. I dont expect there to be peace anytime soon. Sharon created a window of opportunity in the early/mid 200ends, but that closed.
The only way to achieve peace would be massive foreign pressure, which wont happen either.
Even if you disagree with most of what I say, could you answer a simple question? Why does Israel build new settlements in areas, that they would have to give up in any peace-plan?
Last edited:
You enjoy capitalism while you fight to restrain it. Hamas' fight to eliminate Israel is a real threat to the life of myself, my loved ones and each one of my compatriots. When capitalism shoots your little kids in the face on their way back from school I will welcome you back here together with your daft analogies.
I don't take sides. I'm just trying to discuss the issue civilly which is made harder when anyone who criticizes Israel's policies is labeled an anti-Semite who secretly hopes for genocide.
Yes, The Tibetans are suffering to the same degree as the Palestinians (some would even argue that they have suffered more).
Suppression and suffering will always breed a deal of hostility and hatred towards the perceived oppressor. Denying their freedom will not negate this, only reinforce it. The resulting hatred, is the oxygen that keeps Hamas alive.That great *********** Marvin Gaye gave you the answer when he told you "only Love can conquer hate".
Cheers, Kaos. Much appreciated. Take care when you visit Kurdistan.... and scream "Erdogan is a fecking twat" while at Atatturk International Airport
I think most people agree that a nation has a right to defend itself from foreign enemies. The key thing is way Israel is choosing to go about this. The thing is though we are at a stage where no country has the moral standing to tell others what to do, definitely not the superpowers( America/russia/china). So if you are a military strategist who values your soldiers lives above that of the enemy( which almost all military commanders would be trained to do) how do you go about dismantling a terrorist organization deeply imbedded into a civilian population in a densely populated area? It's actually really difficult to come up with a moral solution.
If you are going, enjoyed the intelligent debates. Never meant any offence to you and admire your conviction. Peace is all we all really want.
Rather you did stay though, no matter how sapping.
A STRONG international force that will get a mission to demilitarize the Gaza Strip, and then force Israel/Egypt to lift the blockade providing all Gaza imports go through a Western-supervised inspection mechanism?
Cheers fellas. I'll be in Iraq by the end of the week, so I'll have more pressing security issues to deliberate over like ISIS putting my head on a pike
I must pay this thread more attention. Who has said that? I have read a few that argued about the retrospective validity of the state, but I don't think anyone has argued for the end of Israel, maybe just the end of Israel as it stands as one state excluding the Palestinians.
Hehe, I enjoy it do I? I am 'lucky' enough to be on the right side of the divides it has created, but that doesn't make me stop trying to right the inequality it creates. Unlike you my morality is not dependent on what is convenient for me.
As for my daft analogy. It may be a more tangible threat, but my point, which you have ignored every time I made it, is that the threat posed doesn't warrant the killing of thousnads of inncocents in the world's eyes.
How large would this force need to be? How many Americans involved? ( no really gonna feel really balanced if the majority of this peacekeeping force are from the same countries that invaded iraq) How many countries are willing to sacrifice their own people for the palestinians?
Then the world should send a peacekeeping force there. Unfortunately as has constantly been shown talk is cheap and not many people willing to put thier lives on the line.
That is only partly true, the people whose lives are put on the line in these situations are never part of the decision making process that puts them there.
But yes, there should be a massive peacekeeping force sent in.
None, and neither are we. That's my point. We have had tons of posts suggesting how not to fight Hamas, which hides behind kids in schools, but not a single one with a plausible idea of what we should do in order to lift the rocket and tunnel threat. Oh wait, there were a couple of posts suggesting we send our boys into Gaza "to arrest" those "bad eggs".
Agreed. I'm just way past the sentimental and moral arguments. It's almost as if people don't know the world we live in. I realize that makes me sound like a cynical cnut but governments dont care about the difference between 100 dead kids and 200.
There was an international inspector force in the Rafah crossing as part of an Israeli-Palestinian agreement (remember?). They fled like feckin' rabbits to the sound of the first gunshots during the 2007 Hamas coup.
More lazy Nazi analogies. Wiki.
"The Israeli embassy in Dublin came under criticism twice in the month of July 2014, first for posts likening Free Palestine activists to Hitler, and second for posting doctored images of iconic European art in ways that imply Islam is taking over Europe. The image of the Irish Molly Malone statue was doctored by the Israeli Embassy to show her covered with a Muslim veil along with the words, "Israel now, Dublin next." Following criticism that the anti-Muslim posting promoted hatred and were offensive, they were taken down. The embassy claims it meant no offense."
"The Israeli embassy in Dublin came under criticism twice in the month of July 2014, first for posts likening Free Palestine activists to Hitler, and second for posting doctored images of iconic European art in ways that imply Islam is taking over Europe. The image of the Irish Molly Malone statue was doctored by the Israeli Embassy to show her covered with a Muslim veil along with the words, "Israel now, Dublin next." Following criticism that the anti-Muslim posting promoted hatred and were offensive, they were taken down. The embassy claims it meant no offense."