Middle East Politics

Thanks, that's a genuinely interesting post. Do you have an idea what the age and ethnic profile of these protestors you spoke to was?
Different people, I know some of them personally. I don't like to give details here for obvious reasons, I'll PM you.
 
Idk. Never heard of an ABC documentary being banned anywhere before.
K, won't be then.
There's a documentary which focuses on the likes of Tami Amedidi, that 16 year old Palestinian student that got arrested by ids.
It's not that obviously. I'm only browsing on my phone so didn't look at it till I get to my poota.
 
There's a documentary which focuses on the likes of Tami Amedidi

:lol: Sorry to do this but the girl's name is Ahed Tamimi.

:lol: Charming blokes, aren't they.

I remember reading about how Arab politics back in the 50s and 60s, while still very dysfunctional and brutal, was actually kind of fun, full of crazy characters with nobody really taking themselves too seriously.
 
I remember reading about how Arab politics back in the 50s and 60s, while still very dysfunctional and brutal, was actually kind of fun, full of crazy characters with nobody really taking themselves too seriously.
Leaders then, if not really competent, at least believed in something. Arab league meetings were comedy gold. Some of it is on youtube.

These two are something special though.
 
A territory regained. The 3 state solution is a sham, the entire Arab/Muslim world is an apartheid state.
Some certainly are, to say all or most of them are is a little facetious. Which ones would you classify as 'apartheid' states?
 
JVP advocate a 'right of return' for the Palestinians in line with UN Resolution 194. That would end Israel through demographics. Maybe you believe that would result in democracy where all are equal under the rule of law. I have my doubts.
I think you'll find that if the status quo persists, then the Arabs will outnumber the Israelis within half a century in any case. It's the sole reason why Bibi is pressing on with the illegal settlements in spite of overwhelming opposition internationally.

In any case, why is it wrong for Palestinians who were forced to flee their homes in 1948 to have a right to return? When an Ashkenazi Jew who barely has a genetic link to the region can decide to up sticks and go at any time he or she wishes?

Can you not see how that is inherently unjust? Can you not see that the person who lived in Palestine 60 years ago has more right to an abode there, than the person whose great, great, great, great grand uncle, once removed may or may not have lived there hundreds, possibly even thousands of years ago?

A single democratic State, where all are equal is literally the only way this can be resolved which is fair to all sides in the conflict.
 
A single democratic State, where all are equal

Let's imagine for a second that this comes about by some miracle. What happens if, after say ten or so years, the Jews decide they don't like it, that they would rather go their own way - would they be entitled to the right to secede in order to exercise their right to national self-determination in the same way that the Scots, Catalans and Québécois are?
 
Some certainly are, to say all or most of them are is a little facetious. Which ones would you classify as 'apartheid' states?

Probably this...

freedom-house-2016.png
 
Probably this...

freedom-house-2016.png

This has nothing to do with apartheid. Apartheid South Africa would have likely scored highly too considering they had open and free elections for their legible electorate. As did the US prior to the 60s when they finally undid the Jim Crow debacle.

I'm talking about systems in place where there is an open segregation policy on the basis of race and ethnicity. Which of these countries for instance has different laws and customs for different ethnic groups, where one ethnic group enjoys considerably more beneficial rights and protections than the other?
 
This has nothing to do with apartheid. Apartheid South Africa would have likely scored highly too considering they had open and free elections for their legible electorate. As did the US prior to the 60s when they finally undid the Jim Crow debacle.

I'm talking about systems in place where there is an open segregation policy on the basis of race and ethnicity. Which of these countries for instance has different laws and customs for different ethnic groups, where one ethnic group enjoys considerably more beneficial rights and protections than the other?
Broaden the term from "ethnic" to "social", and - to the best of my knowledge - institutional discrimination of that kind applies to:
  • Women in general
  • Religious minorities
  • Homosexuals and other sexual minorities
  • Migrant workers in several Gulf States, who form a vast and economically vital underclass (in some cases: demographic majority) of heavily discriminated against and easily abused labourers. Often enough this amounts to slave-like conditions, including the prohibition of leaving the country without permission of their employers.
 
Baghdad - Istanbul 'Taurus Express' in the 50s.

DTClkOqWsAAjAmV
 
The predictions of several posters that Israel (or Saudi Arabia via Israel) is about to immediately strike Lebanon were proven to be quite premature as well.


To be fair to myself, they pretty much said it themselves!

 
https://www.facebook.com/corey.robin1/posts/1613837302015318

What Kristofer J. Petersen-Overton said: "This is Jerry Seinfeld—but that's not particularly interesting. What *is* interesting is that when Palestinians pose for similar pictures featuring children and military hardware, it is taken to be symptomatic of a 'culture of hate' and roundly condemned by Zionists and sanctimonious Western liberals alike. By contrast, this is perfectly innocent fun..."


26678657_1968014440191523_5760826276332586531_o.jpg
 
To be fair to myself, they pretty much said it themselves!


Sure, they did, and they ordered their citizens out of Lebanon. But the discrepancy between firebrand rhetoric and nothing actually happening afterwards is a good indicator that it takes more than that for a real escalation.

Doesn't mean it's impossible to happen, or that bin Salman couldn't have been determined to really give it a go. But my point is that not looking for contrary factors, often enough out of prejudice, likely leads to premature conclusions. For example, regarding the Lebanon situation I made the following argument back then:
I thought for the past years it was pretty much established that Israel does not actively seek confrontation in the North – which goes for Hezbollah too. Neither side wants to suffer the heavy casualties and devastation an all-out war would surely cause.

So a premise for the speculative war scenarios earlier in this thread would be a recent, quite radical change in that regard. But are there any credible hints for this (beyond just the general situation concerning Iran, KSA and Syria/Lebanon)?
And Israel has indeed given bin Salman the cold shoulder.
http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/11/16/israel-isnt-going-to-fight-saudi-arabias-wars/

Also well worth a read in this regard is the recent Nasrallah interview (post #607). It gives good insight into how Hezbollah navigates between its long-term goal of ending Israel and day-to-day pragmatism guided by strategic considerations. It seems inevitable that at some point in the future the situation in Southern Lebanon/Northern Israel/Golan will escalate into a full-blown war, but that doesn't mean everyone is only waiting to pull the trigger right now.
 
Last edited: