More Israeli Land theft

[S.A.M.]

SAM, you are the perfect embodiment of that absolutist approach. You also have OCD...

I hear the rhetoric, unfortunately, it does not correspond to facts.

I see a nation forced on the inhabitants by colonisers, the natives under occupation for 60 years, incarcerated in a giant prison within an apartheid wall, with no access to employment, food and basic necessities, targeted daily by a military that shows no mercy (average 100 killed a month due to violence) and snipers children and fires at schools.

Why? For not accepting that the colonisers have a "right" to keep their fundie state confined to their religion and ethnically cleanse the natives who refuse to accept this discrimination. The natives demands to be accepted as equal members of society with equal access to the land and rights as citizens of their own land is extremism and treated as terrorism, keeping 4 million people confined, under 700+ military checkpoints in a space that is 2% of the original. And this is supposed to demonstrate secularism. :crazy:

 

[otheadp]

Just one last response to you: you will find that when you want something happen, you have to act on it in order to make it happen. Demagoguing (ok, just so you understand better i'll call your demagoguing "fact listing") ... so, just listing the facts will not bring you closer to what you would like to happen, because that would just be talking to yourself. You need to engage the other side.

How:
(1) war, or

(2) negotiations.

Yes, the Israelis are doing X, Y and Z, but talking about what they're doing will not bring you closer to liberation. You need to act.

What you are doing is inconsequential. Unhelpful. It doesn't help anyone. Do you understand that?

OK, I'm done. Have fun OCDing shit up.

 

[S.A.M.]

Just one last response to you: you will find that when you want something happen, you have to act on it in order to make it happen. Demagoguing (ok, just so you understand better i'll call your demagoguing "fact listing") ... so, just listing the facts will not bring you closer to what you would like to happen, because that would just be talking to yourself. You need to engage the other side.

How:
(1) war, or

(2) negotiations.

Yes, the Israelis are doing X, Y and Z, but talking about what they're doing will not bring you closer to liberation. You need to act.

What you are doing is inconsequential. Unhelpful. It doesn't help anyone. Do you understand that?

OK, I'm done. Have fun OCDing shit up.

I'm all for a one state solution; its the only long term solution that will work. Anything else is just borrowing trouble.

I've actually elaborated on this earlier in a discussion with Michael.

My ideas:

Recognise that religious fundamentalism breeds intolerance, on any side.

Recognise that discrimination breeds victims and a victim mentality that is not useful or productive

Recognise that the world is too small to segregate successfully. Assimilation and integration is the future. Not separation.

My solution is for Israel:

Throw all the religious claptrap aside

Create a one state.

Give equal rights to all, regardless of religion ethnicity or political compass

Use the money going into killing people for sustaining people

What I forsee.

1. It will remove the compalint re:discrimination entirely
2. It will give Israel the higher moral ground and force the Arabs to compromise
3. It will be the first step to a lasting peace.

As used to be, Jerusalem can have the Jewish Quarter, the Muslim Quarter and the Christian Quarter, so as to convert it into a true meeting point for all three religions, with open access to all the religious monuments for all people.

I think only the Israelis can carry off something of this magnitude.

But will they? When Israel was just a dream, the Saudi imam of Mecca said that the Jews were coming home and as always would bring progress and prosperity with them as they had in the past. I think that promise is long overdue.

As an aside, I have met both Israelis and Palestinians who share this view and I cannot for the life of me think why this is not a more popular option.

 

[Axes]

As an aside, I have met both Israelis and Palestinians who share this view and I cannot for the life of me think why this is not a more popular option.[/QUOTE]





Because, Sam, people want the right to self-determination. By creating one state "shared" by Israelis and Palestinians, you effectively nullify both peoples desire to self-govern. Forced integration of two peoples has worked very few times in history, and many times created much more bloodshed than the alternative (Yugoslavia, Checoslovakia, Austria-Hungaria). Those countries descended into civil-war because their minorities wanted their own country. If you force both Jews and Palestinians into another quasi-fake-state, then you will be repeating the mistakes the great powers did in the 19th centuary in the middle east.

The best solution is two free independent states for two peoples, living in peace side by side.

 

[otheadp]

Excellent point, Axes. Besides, the "one state solution" has been tried before. Before 1948 (the creation of Israel), during the British mandate and Ottoman control, when there was effectively one "state", there has always been bloodshed between Palestinian Jews and Arabs. Trying it again while the 2 peoples (and I'm using this term very loosely when referring to the "Palestinians") have massive baggages is a terrible idea.

 

[iceaura]

- - But having the religious fundies in the Muslim world accept Israel's right to exist is a necessary precondition because all else flaws from that. If that is not achieved first, no "agreement" will hold water.

I thought that happened thirty years ago and more, on the 1967 borders. Seems like it's happened since, anyway, with reference to those borders.

AFAIK every Muslim neighbor of Israel has agreed to let Israel be, and attempted to negotiate the exact terms, and been rejected by the US and Israel.

Would the Geneva Conventions regarding occupied territories be a good model, think you, for settling matters between Israel and Palestine ?

Israel's compromise was giving up of Sinai, and the moral right to hold on to that land as it was the spoils of war which were won fair and square. That's how all borders get drawn everywhere: with blood. Yes, including the peace-loving nations of Canada, New Zealand, Finland, Belgium, etc. At one time or another there has been blood shed to draw those borders.

Since WWII, and the establishment of various means of settling such matters, very few countries have expanded their borders. Israel is the only significant one.

The reason agreements were made between nations after WWII is that people had had a good look at endless war, and realized it was no longer a reasonable option.

Even Machiavelli warns the Prince against stealing land. You must kill anyone you rob like that, he observes, because otherwise "Men sooner forgive the loss of their fathers than the loss of their patrimony" .

Do you think the 600 farmers regard Israel's seizure of their farms as "fair and square" or the "spoils of war" ? What are the realistic odds of Israel succeeding in driving the Palestinians out entirely ?

Israel was driven out of Lebanon after 20 years of occupation, by guerrilla warfare. It has since arranged to reinvade once - but again the occupation proved difficult. Occupations and military oppressions are getting more difficult, in modern times.

 

[otheadp]

every Muslim neighbor of Israel has agreed to let Israel be

• Egypt: yes
• Jordan: yes
• Syria: yes - but it gets complicated because of Iran
• Lebanon: yes/no - 2 influences there: Iran and Syria, both preventing peace talks because of 2 separate collections of interests
• The PA: yes/no - same as above, but it's even worse as there are now 2 entities to deal with, each with their own degree of rejectionism.

Since WWII, and the establishment of various means of settling such matters, very few countries have expanded their borders. Israel is the only significant one.

You got it backwards: peace has not been preserved thanks to those rules. It was those rules which were preserved thanks to the peace.

Believe me, this has happened countless times: when shit hits the fan, the rules get tossed out the window.

Do you think the 600 farmers regard Israel's seizure of their farms as "fair and square" or the "spoils of war"?

That territory is spoils of war from 1967. It is sovereign Israeli territory whose status is to be negotiated over, maybe, at future talks which most "Palestinians" don't even want to attend.

Anyway I can write you many paragraphs explaining things, but it's no use. The "Palestinians" are not miserable because of that so-called "land grab" of which "Ha'Aretz" does not approve of. It is because of 60 years of Arab governments' toying with them as if they're pawns, in their plan to genocide the Jews.

 

[S.A.M.]

The "Palestinians" are not miserable because of that so-called "land grab" of which "Ha'Aretz" does not approve of. It is because of 60 years of Arab governments' toying with them as if they're pawns, in their plan to genocide the Jews.

The very fact that you refuse to recognise them, "Israel", shows your true feelings

 

[otheadp]

The very fact that you refuse to recognise them, "Israel", shows your true feelings

Putting aside historical logic to not recognise any fairytale "people" (which you will obviously dispute), it comes down to interests. So why should Israel recognise any quasi-people? What's in it for Israel?

 

[S.A.M.]

Putting aside historical logic to not recognise any fairytale "people" (which you will obviously dispute), it comes down to interests. So why should Israel recognise any quasi-people? What's in it for Israel?

quasi-people? Like Jews throughout history?

Your ideology is repugnant to me.

 

[iceaura]

That territory is spoils of war from 1967. It is sovereign Israeli territory whose status is to be negotiated over, maybe, at future talks which most "Palestinians" don't even want to attend.

Taking your word, that would make its residents, living on the land and farming it and owning it since 1967, citizens of sovereign Israel. Their government has now taken their land at gunpoint, and given it to immigrants, and caged them.

How do you think that would play out in, say, Iowa ?

Not taking your word, we recall that the PLO (as well as every other group involved over the years) has offered negotiations, which have been undermined and rejected by Israel and the US, while Israel continues to expand, adding new territory to its control every year.

You got it backwards: peace has not been preserved thanks to those rules. It was those rules which were preserved thanks to the peace.

Except in at least one region, where the rules were not observed, and the peace not preserved in direct consequence.

 

[otheadp]

quasi-people? Like Jews throughout history?

Your ideology is repugnant to me.

And your delusional OCD-filled posts are laughable (I don't get mad at invalids.)

So what? It's of no consequence.

 

[S.A.M.]

I think the next step for Palestinians would be to demand Israeli citizenship, since they are under occupation and have been since 60 years.

In fact, I would not be surprised if that was what came up next.

 

[S.A.M.]

It's of no consequence.

There are 6 million people who would disagree.

And another 8-10 million who would have something to say about that.

 

[otheadp]

Taking your word, that would make its residents, living on the land and farming it and owning it since 1967, citizens of sovereign Israel. Their government has now taken their land at gunpoint, and given it to immigrants, and caged them.

At least they weren't forcibly evicted from their homes like it was done to the Jewish Gazan residents. The victims in this case are absentee owners.

How do you think that would play out in, say, Iowa ?

The US federal and state governments have been stealing peoples' houses with the Imminent Domain law since forever. Usually it's because some big business wants to build a mall and the private owner's house is in the way.

Not taking your word, we recall that the PLO (as well as every other group involved over the years) has offered negotiations, which have been undermined and rejected by Israel and the US, while Israel continues to expand, adding new territory to its control every year.

Are you familiar with Arafat's tactics? Here are a few:

• Say one thing in English to the western media ("let's negotiate") and another thing in Arabic to the Arab world ("let's bomb")
• Refuse negotiations when called upon while killing Jews, until a spectacular attack is launched that gets Israel so mad they're about to seriously retaliate, and then talk about peace and negotiations. Israel launches a big operation right after a "call for negotiations" by Arafat

That's just a few. The PLO only "recognized" Israel's right to exist (only on paper of course) in 1993. Before that it was just rejectionist terrorist campaigns for 30 years straight.

 

[S.A.M.]

Because, Sam, people want the right to self-determination.

Like native Americans and Aborigines?

Bully for them.

I bet the Nazis wanted self determination too, as did the apartheid regime in South Africa.

Any regime based on sustained genocide and ethnic cleansing wants self determination.

So what?

 

[iceaura]

How do you think that would play out in, say, Iowa ? ”

The US federal and state governments have been stealing peoples' houses with the Imminent Domain law since forever.

So you are equating this Israeli tactic with a forced sale. Interesting.

Any idea how much the government paid, and how the price was negotiated?

That's just a few. The PLO only "recognized" Israel's right to exist (only on paper of course) in 1993. Before that it was just rejectionist terrorist campaigns for 30 years straight.

And since they were the last holdouts, according to you, that cleared the way for the end of this.

14 years ago.

At least they weren't forcibly evicted from their homes like it was done to the Jewish Gazan residents.

Others have been. Many thousands.

From homes that were more clearly "theirs".

 

[otheadp]

So you are equating this Israeli tactic with a forced sale. Interesting.

When it comes down to substance, not principle, it's the same thing.

And by the way, the "settlers" were forcibly dragged kicking and screaming out of their houses... teenagers, girls, etc.

And since they were the last holdouts, according to you, that cleared the way for the end of this.

14 years ago.

No. In 1993 the media games started (see previous post re: Arafat's games).
And guess what: PLO's armed branch still launches terrorist attacks, and PLO's (PA's) Education "ministry" indoctrinates its children with rabid hate and does not have a single map with "Israel" on the map -- the whole "Palestine" is designated as "Palestine".

 

[S.A.M.]

the whole "Palestine" is designated as "Palestine".

The settler territories are designated as settler territories in Israeli maps?

 

[iceaura]

When it comes down to substance, not principle, it's the same thing.

And by the way, the "settlers" were forcibly dragged kicking and screaming out of their houses... teenagers, girls, etc.

And then some of them were run over with tanks, some shot, some incarcerated and tortured, and the rest put into fenced off reservations to keep them from being violent.

Or maybe not, eh?

It seems we have differences of substance, as well as having abandoned our principles, in these matters. Do you suppose there is a connection ?