Gaza

[Harrier Dude]

No, I'm proposing the opposite. If Hamas wants to become the legitimate leadership of the Palestinian people, they need to renounce terrorism, reign in the splinter groups and moderate their position on Israel, I.E., the tie solution.

I think we're in agreement for most of this.

Do you think that they are capable of this kind of compromise? I don't.

I think that a large percentage of their population would agree to that, but the political base, the Muslim extremists, (and therefore their leadership) are basically irrational and would never go for anything short of the elimination of the Jewish state.

We'll never see a rational solution, or even debate, with an irrational actor.

But yes, I think that we basically agree at least on what SHOULD happen. What will ACTUALLY happen? Probably not so much.

 

[Spekkio]

Are you talking generally, or in the case of Israel? I would imagine that if Israel started carpet bombing Gaza and the West Bank, the wrath they would incur from the international community, the Arab world and every swinging Muslim extremist dick would far outweigh any benefit. There would also be an extraordinary amount of backlash from the US, particularly under this administration. So, in my view, it's got more to do with cost/benefit calculus than spinelessness.

Every swinging Muslim dick may hate Israel for it, but the only nation they really have to fear waging war against them for it is Iran.

As for the U.S. not supporting Israel if they waged total war...I'm not so sure. I think Obama would make a few speeches denouncing it publicly, but we'd still support Israel military. Something about Israel being the lone democratic state among a bunch of nations that support or finance terrorist organizations not-so-under-the-table is enticing to U.S. support, especially if we have an opportunity to waste their assets while profiting from a buyer.

 

[Brett327]

Hard to know, but ruling it out doesn't make for a particularly fruitful starting point for negotiations. I think I said earlier that its going to take leadership on both sides willing to take political risks for the sake of the possibility of a solution. Time will tell.

 

[MasterBates]

You know, when the middle east was carved up post WWII, there was a Palestinian state. It was called East Palestine, or Trans-Jordan.

You now know it as Jordan.

Sent from my PH44100 using Tapatalk 2

 

[jmcquate]

You know, when the middle east was carved up post WWII, there was a Palestinian state. It was called East Palestine, or Trans-Jordan.

You now know it as Jordan.

Sent from my PH44100 using Tapatalk 2

Yea, and Arafat tried to overthrow the King of Jordan. There's a reason no Arab state wants the Palestinians inside thier borders.

 

[Flash]

You know, when the middle east was carved up post WWII, there was a Palestinian state. It was called East Palestine, or Trans-Jordan.

You now know it as Jordan.

When the Middle East was carved up post-WWI the Emirate of Transjordan was created by the British and specifically excluded from the British Mandate of Palestine. If Transjordan/Trans-Jordan/Jordan was ever called East Palestine it wasn't called so officially and was never considered as one entity even by the Turks pre-WWI. Any official association between the land on the east and west banks of the Jordan River were only temporary/fleeting and never official. Interestingly the only places I can find reference to modern-day Jordan, Israel and the Palestinian territories all being called Palestine online are on sites that are very pro-Israel.

The simple fact is that many of the nations of the Arab Middle East are post-WWI creations of the French and the British along with the attendant nationalities. But even if modern Iraqi, Qatari and Palestinian nationality is a pretty recent creation the simple fact is that the current citizens of those respective countries/territories are descendants of people who resided in those locations for many long years, in many cases as long as those who now reside in modern European countries and certainly longer than the vast majority of Americans have resided in our country. Denying those folks who lived in pre-WWII Palestine their right to nationality is specious and blatantly unfair.

 

[MasterBates]

Much like if the Japanese want to dictate terms to the US Military, they should have fought harder in 1945, if the Arab/Palestinians wanted to dictate terms to Israel, they should have had their shit together more in '48, '56, '67 and '73, when there were no shit, open wars with armies.

Generally, taking land and holding it made it yours throughout history. Why is that not the case now?

 

[BACONATOR]

No, I'm proposing the opposite. If Hamas wants to become the legitimate leadership of the Palestinian people, they need to renounce terrorism, reign in the splinter groups and moderate their position on Israel, I.E., the tie solution.

I think we're in agreement for most of this.

No, I wasn't speaking about Genocie. What I am saying is that Israel needs to continue to be strong and ignore certain "UN Sanctions" like it has in the past when they get attacked, yet "forbidden" from fighting back by the rest of the civilized world. I am WELL aware that there is a great disparity of the religious and political ideologies of Arabs. I am talking about a select group of arabs in the problem countries surrounding Israel and the countries who back the terrorism that constantly rains down on Israel (ie: Iran supporting Hamas, etc). As for Hamas being the palestinian leadership if it denounces terrorism? Uh.... maybe I'm a bit of a pessimist, but that seems to be the intrinsic NATURE of hamas to be a terrorist organization, or so our CIC has declared.

The problem is that after such a long conflict, it's tough to deal with the fringe that is the problem. And the longer the fighting continues, that fringe has a lasting effect on the masses. Most Arabs aren't personally terrorists, nor do they personally act out against Israel, but after 75 years of living in a shithole and having the thugs in power tell you it's "all Israel's fault!", most of the folks aren't very favorable toward Israel and thus are acquiescent to the Fringe's tactics.

I personally doubt that any of the arab countries surrounding Israel will ever be friendly, nor do I believe the Palestinians will ever have a peaceable leader. It will always be a violent, theocratic caliphate.

We all KNOW Israel is incapable of genocide (NOT that I was even advocating that), anyway. They don't even strike as "unfairly" as America. They drop leaflets warning civilians of impending strikes and they hold back their first a LOT more than I think America would in a similar circumstance.

What I am saying, is that I hope Israel fights back, because regardless of what the rest of the world thinks, these thugs aren't open to "diplomacy" and, in fact, view it as weakness if they can attack with impunity and receive no response.

On a personal level? Yeah, I'd like to see most of the middle east turned into a sheet of glass. Start the etch-a-sketch over. But realistically? Obviously that can't be the case and America/Israel and the greater world powers would never let that happen.

It just boggles my mind how ignorant people are. The average person on the street doesn't know if Israel is a muslim nation or not, and doesn't know if it's an ally or we are at war with them with troops in country. So how can I expect most of America to understand how Israel is a first-world, secular, democratic nation who conducts themselves civilly, while all their neighbors are islamic/caliphate, 3rd-world nations who want nothing but to wipe an entire people off the map and kill civilians at every chance, supporting terrorism silently under the guise of being a progressive "world-player" nation.

 

[HAL Pilot]

 

[Fog]

When I read it first in the 60's, Albert Camus' The Plague was often considered an allegory of Naziism. Actually Camus was born a few decades early, because IMHO it more closely resembles the rise & spread of Islamic Jihad. Just sayin'.

 

[wink]

Denying those folks who lived in pre-WWII Palestine their right to nationality is specious and blatantly unfair.

So there was once a King of Palestine, a Palestine Prime Minister, an Army of Palestine or Border Guard, those things that denote statehood?

 

[Flash]

So there was once a King of Palestine, a Palestine Prime Minister, an Army of Palestine or Border Guard, those things that denote statehood?

Before 1947 when was the last time there was a 'nation' of Israel? Two thousand years, give or take a few? Plus they have many of those things now. You want to go back that far to start to redress wrongs inflicted on folks when it comes to taking land from them most of us might as well pack up and go back to the old world. Many of the Arabs who were living in Palestine before WWI had been there for generations, to deny their right to live in that area or even there mere existence is a denial of hundreds of years of history.

These arguments are certainly interesting from an information operations perspective, both sides seem to have honed their arguments well which I guess is inevitable after a couple decades of practice.

 

[wink]

Before 1947 when was the last time there was a 'nation' of Israel? Two thousand years, give or take a few? Plus they have many of those things now. You want to go back that far to start to redress wrongs inflicted on folks when it comes to taking land from them most of us might as well pack up and go back to the old world. Many of the Arabs who were living in Palestine before WWI had been there for generations, to deny their right to live in that area or even there mere existence is a denial of hundreds of years of history.

These arguments are certainly interesting from an information operations perspective, both sides seem to have honed their arguments well which I guess is inevitable after a couple decades of practice.

So we agree, there never was a state or nation of Palestine. I have no interest in going back two thousand years for the purposes of this discussion, but to be clear, Israel was not only a state by any definition but I believe that Israel existed with Jerusalem as it's capital more than once before modern democratic Israel. Palestine, never. Some folks forget that.

As to where the Palestinians should live, well correct me if I am wrong, but there never were forcible relocations or cleansing of Arabs from the partitioned Israel. Palestinians left of their own accord to join their brethren in Trans Jordan or immigrated to other Arab countries. I also believe that all privately held Palestinians property was paid for and title transfered when they chose to leave. Then, the countries they fled to took up arms against Israel and no doubt many Palestinians fought in that war. Ever since then the other Arab nations have used Palestinians as pawns.

Many times in history ethnic and religious peoples have been displaced. Some times with violence, unlike the Palestinian migration from their homes in the new Israel. India/Pakistan. Pakistan/Bangladesh. The Balkans, Sudetenland etc. And while war sometimes resulted during what one might call the transition, and sometime uneasy peace remains today, NOWHERE is the result like that in the middle east. That is not the fault of Israel. If Hamas put down their arms and put that effort into self government and investment they would live in peace forever. Israel would be no threat. You can't say the same for an Israeli self disarmament. If Israel laid down every arm it would be over run and no Palestinian would allow Jews to live peaceably in the new Palestine, like Arab-Israelis do in Israel today. You can debate a solution, but there is no doubt who the agaggressors are and who is reasonable about a peace. Arafat had a state and he walked away becauses Israel would continue to exist.

 

[BACONATOR]

Let's not forget that when the land was "usurped" by the jews, it was basically given as a consolation prize and "sorry for the genocide. U mad bro?", and given AS-IS, which was a fucking disgusting swampy swath of land. So.... it begs the question why the israeli side has turned a swamp wasteland into a beautiful, first-world democratic nation at the world table, whereas the palestinian side is a dump? I know the first argument is going to something along the lines of "Yeah, well with US as an ally....". Well, guess what? Allies make or break a lot of places, no startup nation goes it completely alone and if the palestinians weren't such a backward, corrupt and terrorist-harboring settlement, I'm sure they could get large-power democratic allies to help turn their land into a beautiful and formidable state/country/settlement/etc.


Anyway, this debate will never be over. Even if the Arabs and Jews got along famously tomorrow morning, the focus would just turn into civil war between the secular majority and fringe orthodox jewish minority in Israel. Believe me.... you put enough jews together and the bitching never quite goes away. They are just political bedfellows while the Arabs are afoot.

Oh, except for the Neturei Karta and similar fringe wackos. Those assholes meet with palestinian and arab leaders and applaud their efforts to overthrow the israeli government. Beyond orthodox-orthodox jews. Because "If god didn't give us Israel it doesn't belong to us, so we need to give it back until he does". What fucking assholes....

 

[scoober78]

So we agree, there never was a state or nation of Palestine. I have no interest in going back two thousand years for the purposes of this discussion, but to be clear, Israel was not only a state by any definition but I believe that Israel existed with Jerusalem as it's capital more than once before modern democratic Israel. Palestine, never. Some folks forget that.

Uhhh...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franco-British_boundary_agreement_(1920)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transjordan_memorandum

Your claim is simply wrong. This isn't me advocating any position or another, it's simply history. That map dates to 1920...

Many times in history ethnic and religious peoples have been displaced. Some times with violence unlike the Palestinian migration from their homes in the new Israel. India/Pakistan. Pakistan/Bangladesh. The Balkans, Sudetenland etc. And while war sometimes resulted during what one might call the transition, and sometime uneasy peace remains today, NOWHERE is the result like that in the middle east.

India and Pakistan have fought four major wars since 1947. Sounds awfully familiar. Additionally, they are currently in "semi-active" conflict in the Kashmir. Finally, let's not forget that their mutual animosity led to them both developing the A/H-bomb. Again...pretty familiar and rising out of the same basic issues. Religious differences and forced partition.