and then they deploy methods of people dumping to lighten the load and creating enemies while they steal and live high on the hog.
The two state solution fate
- Thread starter iceaura
- Start date
- Status
and then they deploy methods of people dumping to lighten the load and creating enemies while they steal and live high on the hog.
Exactly. Solidarity against the outside invader has long been the trump card of tyrants the world over.
Obviously, on the grounds that, when faced with a choice between consolidating their position or advancing the material and national interests of the Palestinian nation, they consistently choose the former. Why else?
Not that that's anything unique. All regimes display the same fundamental commitment to their own preservation: that's what gets them into power in the first place. The problem is that in undemocratic settings, this interest can (and typically will) diverge from the broader interests of the nation in question.
It wasn't Peres that cut off Erdogan, but the forum moderator, David Ignatius. And it was on procedural grounds: anyone familiar with Ignatius knows that he is exceedingly professional and impartial.
And anyone who's ever attended an international forum of that sort knows exactly how restless the attendees become as dinner time approaches.
Read "Bush" and the "war on terror"
How does an oppressed people, surviving in an open air prison, advance material and national interests? Particularly when their lawful, democratically elected government is not recognized?
How does the fact that the word 'democratic" has so many different interpretations? In Israel the government is democratic? In Palestine the government is not. They were BOTH voted in by the people?
Right, so this "peace" talk was about something other than Palestinians having any?quadraphonics said:
Moderated by a skilful Westerner, whom the Muslim world would view with suspicion?
Wonder why the Turks have chosen to believe their (obviously seriously deluded) version of events, then? Erdogan was just proposing they adjourn for lunch, he was feeling peckish?
Lots of ways. Palestinians aren't the first nation in history to cope with occupation, you know.
And let's not assume that said oppression is some fact of nature, which does not depend on Hamas's actions and views. The West Bank is not similarly blockaded, for one thing.
Hamas is neither lawful, nor democratically elected. And there are many avenues of action available to them that do not depend on recognition by any outside power.
Likewise, there are reasonable steps they could take to address the recognition issue, such as renoucning terrorism and recognizing Israel's right to exist.
???
Largely, yes.
Well, certainly not in Gaza anyway.
Voting is necessary, but not sufficient, for democracy. You also have to have a meaningful civil society, absolute prohibition on participation by armed groups, etc.
And then there's the whole part where Hamas did not peacefully accept the mandate afforded them by the electoral outcome, as one does in a democracy, but instead siezed complete control of Gaza by the use of violence against political rivals. Is that what you consider "democracy?"
What peace talk? This was at a meeting of the IMF. It's not a forum for discussion of security issues at all. Frankly, the entire exchange was inappropriate.
Even supposing the purpose of an IMF summit was outreach to the Muslim world, the implication that any Western moderator would be viewed with suspicion sort of rules out any productive approach anyway... meanwhile, Ignatius regularly moderates such forums, to great effect. Go read some Post Global if you don't believe me.
??? No, Erdogan was proposing that everyone sit and listen to him and Peres get into an off-topic flame-fest about Israel, causing them to miss their dinners.
Bullshit of course. It wasn't Hamas that had an issue with the mandate. They swept the elections by a wide margin. It was the Americans and Israelis who immediately armed their corrupt stooges Fatah to dismiss Hamas.
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/04/gaza200804
Regime change and overthrow being democratic by American standards.
If you like. Although that doesn't add up to an argument that Hamas has a legitimate democratic mandate, just that the United States and Fatah are responsible for the lack of it. And, anyway, that still leaves the first two points, which is that democracy is impossible absent a vital civil society, and an absolute prohibition on the participation of armed political groups.
It's very easy to win elections, when you can credibly threaten people who vote for your opponents with death. So much so that you often don't need to do much actual threatening, and even less actual killing. Likewise, when the voters have no independent capacity for political organization or policy evaluation.
Last edited:
Democracy is impossible in an occupied society. Wow. What an epiphany.
And there were observers who noted that the elections were fair and transparent, excpt in Jerusalem
But don't let details like that keep you from reaching an objective conclusion.
And there were observers who noted that the elections were fair and transparent, excpt in Jerusalem
But don't let details like that keep you from reaching an objective conclusion.
Hey, I'm not the one who keep acting as though that's not the case.
That's great. You may notice that I've never expressed any problem with the actual voting in those elections. I have been explicit that the problems lie elsewhere.
This recurrent practice of presenting tangential (or even non-sequitur) statements as if they constitute relevant arguments is making me wonder whether you are intentionally dishonest, stupid or merely lazy.
superstring01
Moderator
The more I see and hear from her, the more I think she needs to be at the helm of the Israeli government.
~String
Heh, she fooled you too, eh?
Ah so the elections were fair and transparent, but still not democratic because of the occupation and the attempted regime change tried by Israel which armed Fatah to get rid of the elected members and replace them with corrupt politicians more willing to keep quiet as Israel takes the land, as is currently the status quo in the West Bank.
Is that what you meant?
superstring01
Moderator
By "fool" you are implying that I've somehow been duped into not thinking and/or seeing things the way you do-- which isn't going to happen no matter who is at the helm of "The Zionist Entity". I know who she is, and I like her. Which is more than I can say for the current PM.
~String
She's a complete snake. She's been concealing the expansion of the west bank settlements on private Palestinian property. If there is one thing the Israeli government is consistently good at, its lying and misrepresentation of their policy.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/aug/26/israelandthepalestinians
superstring01
Moderator
You just provided descriptions to about every major world leader. Including that of Palestine.
~String
- Status