Palestinians with cameras

[FalconX2000]

My first thread creation on Yabs! :biggrin:


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/25819941#25819941

Well fuckin hell...kudos to whoever thought of this idea.

[Solaris]

So long as the bad guys don't target the cameras as well, it *is* a good thing... sigh. Maybe it'll help bring reforms that will defuse some of the anger in the area.

I think they need to give out enough cameras so that the bad actors can't possibly get them all.

[Christopher Cross Is God]

This can't be true. All Israelis are little angels, while Palestinians are evil muslims who cause chaos wherever they tread.

Seriously, though, this camera stuff is a good thing, but some Palestinians are going to get beaten down more severely than they have before. Israeli soldiers will try to make an example out of a few of them to make the Palestinians afraid of carrying cameras around.

[MartinRedmond]

It's beyond me why anyone would think that making camps of settlers in an hostile country would be a good idea. Some of the Isreali are really stubborn in their faith, it's untrue.

[Typo Lad]

Illegal settlers aren't stubborn in their faith, they're stubborn in Zionism. Huge difference.

And the cameras were the idea of an Israeli group, B'Tzelem.

[kitty_tc_69]

I'm going to get flamed for this, but Israel is evil. I don't have any problems at all with jewish people, but the nation is and it's government and military and whole policy structure are vile hateful filth that should be dissolved and cursed. What they have done and continue to do is abominable and unforgivable.

If I were running the world I'd make Jerusalem an independent, neutral city-state open to all, give the bulk of current Israel back to it's native people, and make a new jewish state in eastern europe somewhere, you know, where the actual jews who were persecuted and genocided came from. Get them the fuck out of the middle east for good. Let the hardliners and Likudniks keep Tel Aviv and a reasonable area around it, with all their nukes and military and let them stay and fight if they want, let the peace-loving majority of israeli jews have a place of their own out of the desert in a place where things actually grow and they can live more like they did before Hitler displaced them from their homes in europe.

That's what should have been done in the damned first place, they should have gotten east germany instead of the soviets, or a portion of both sides should have been given to them. The aggressor should have been the one to cede territory, not someone else entirely who was never involved in the atrocity to begin with. All that did was create new victims and a new cycle of violence we're still suffering with to this day.

[MartinRedmond]

Illegal settlers aren't stubborn in their faith, they're stubborn in Zionism. Huge difference.

And the cameras were the idea of an Israeli group, B'Tzelem.


Sorry, I should read up more on this. Of course, I don't judge all jewish people based on thiss. Thanks for the correction Serpentor.

[Typo Lad]

I'm going to get flamed for this, but Israel is evil.

I don't want to flame you or anything, but I think that is a very blanket statement, yes.

I don't have any problems at all with jewish people,

Whew. Also, I'd like to point out that not all Israelis are Jewish, by any stretch of the imagination.

but the nation is and it's government and military and whole policy structure are vile hateful filth that should be dissolved and cursed. What they have done and continue to do is abominable and unforgivable.

I think you're being overly dramatic and showing a woeful lack of actual knowledge. Not everyone in the government or military is evil,, and to say so is hyperbolicious.

If I were running the world I'd make Jerusalem an independent, neutral city-state open to all,

That is, and always has been the general plan since even before Oslo - to make Jerusalem an International City.

give the bulk of current Israel back to it's native people, and make a new jewish state in eastern europe somewhere, you know, where the actual jews who were persecuted and genocided came from.

Inaccurate. There are a large number of Ethiopian, Yeminite, and Persian Jews who were indeed being persecuted. Israel is about more than the Holocaust.

Get them the fuck out of the middle east for good. Let the hardliners and Likudniks keep Tel Aviv and a reasonable area around it, with all their nukes and military and let them stay and fight if they want, let the peace-loving majority of israeli jews have a place of their own out of the desert in a place where things actually grow and they can live more like they did before Hitler displaced them from their homes in europe.

And what would you do with all the non-Eastewrn European Jews, Israeli Arabs, and Christians who live there?

That's what should have been done in the damned first place, they should have gotten east germany instead of the soviets, or a portion of both sides should have been given to them. The aggressor should have been the one to cede territory, not someone else entirely who was never involved in the atrocity to begin with. All that did was create new victims and a new cycle of violence we're still suffering with to this day.

the Balfour Declaration (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration_of_1917) pre-dates the end of WWII, and even the start.

Open a history book. Israel was not a reaction to the Holocaust.

Hell, after the Holocaust, Jews were banned from immigrating for some time.

It's not that simple.

[Typo Lad]

Sorry, I should read up more on this. Of course, I don't judge all jewish people based on thiss. Thanks for the correction Serpentor.
...

Serpentor?

Settlers are a huge issue in Israel. One of the reasons the "Secutiry Wall" is actually being built is not to keep anyone out, but to keep the Kach nutjobs in. I was against the wall until I had that pointed out to me, and was fully won over when the Israeli Supreme Court found in favor of those claiming the Military was snatching land along the way.

As for Palestinians... I want to add one thing, especially for Kitty. As poorly as Palestinians have been treated in Israel, and as messy as the situation is... they fair worse in Egypt, where they're used for target practice, or in Jordan, where even having family in Palestine makes you suspect of trying to sneak some in.

It's an intensly complicated situation on all sides, and the people on the ground want peace. The news only covers the extremists, be they Israeli or Palestinian, military or civilian, goverment or militia. No-one talks about groups like B'Tzelem or the camp that brings Israeli/Palestinian kids together. The media fuels the cycle of hate.

[Charles RB]

make a new jewish state in eastern europe somewhere

Then we can have the exact same problems that started when Israel was formed, only now in Eastern Europe. There've been enough problems in Eastern Europe, we don't need to import more of them.


That's what should have been done in the damned first place, they should have gotten east germany instead of the soviets

Why would Jews from Poland, Austria, Norway, et al want to go live in East Germany, when even a lot of the Jews from Germany didn't want to go back? And what do you do with all the people already living there, where are you going to move them to right after continent-wide urban devastation? And then you'd end up with an Israeli Defence Force just as aggressive and paranoid, possibly more so, because they'd have the Soviet Union on their border during the Cold War and on the other side is the country that tried offing them.

[Charles RB]

Anyway, the cameras - it's a great idea.

I'm quite bewildered to see someone putting a tent on farmland and that this means the IDF are stopping the farmer from using his farmland. What logic is going on there?

[kitty_tc_69]

The whole damned thing is a mess, I think that much we can all agree on. And after reading article after article for years about all the atrocities committed by the state of Israel and it's government and military for so many years, it's hard not to be angry about the issue. They get preferential treatment thanks to America's intervention on their behalf in the UN, they get a free pass for the kind of human rights violations that other nations like China get lambasted for --and worse. They even get a blind eye turned to the fact that they possess a massive nuclear arsenal in violation of the Non-Proliferation treaty, all the while they (with American support as usual) get to rattle the sabre at Iran for allegedly having ambitions for nukes of their own. It's infuriating, to say the least.

I'm well aware that most of the Israeli population are good people and want peace. They are to be commended for this and encouraged and supported wherever and however possible. Grace under pressure indeed. Unfortunately, their government does not reflect the goodness in their hearts --a fact that no doubt pains them greatly.

That's why I wish it were possible to just make a new spot for those people in eastern europe, or that it had been done in the first place. Sure, you can point out problems and poke holes in it, it's sure as hell not a perfect solution --but what we've got sure as hell isn't working either. Ideally (and I know, pipe dream) we could get those peace-loving good people their own plot of land outside the middle east where there are trees and fertile soil and something to build on that could sustain them. I don't think they'll find it stuck out in the damned desert, that's for sure. Let the settlers and the zionists and likudniks and warmongers keep their military and hostility in the Tel Aviv area and let them fight it out to their blackened heart's content. Only caveat, give the nukes they have to the new country, so they have a deterrent to keep away the spectre of genocide forever.

Just idle dreaming, the whole damned thing is just depressing and frustrating and rage-inducing. And most of all, it's tragic. If only we could put all the hostiles on a nice barren wasteland and let them fight it out amongst themselves where there could be no innocent casualties, you know? But like most conflicts, that's not how it works, and the hammer falls hardest on the most innocent and vulnerable on both sides.

Like a great many progressives, I remain a non-racist critic of the policies and actions of the Israeli regime and a condemner of it's crimes. I want to see justice done. That doesn't extend to punishing the peaceful majority, or condemning or judging people for their religion, national identity, or race. And I applaud those Israelis (and there are a lot of them) who bravely take a stand for what's right. I only wish they had power to change things in equal measure to their nobility. If that were the case, we could solve this whole bloody mess once and for all.

[OzBat!]

As has been pointed out, moving the problem to eastern Europe would have just displaced MORE people groups with historical connections to the land that the jewish settlers wouldn't have had, and made the situation worse. It's a pipe dream that ignores the fact it'd be perpetuating the same problems it retroactively proposes to fix.

[Typo Lad]

Kitty, a lot of what you're saying is ignoring the facts on the ground, which is what got the Middle East in this mess in the first place.

Israel exists. It has some bad politicians, but not all of them are bad. Palestinians exist. For decades Israeli politicians argued over what to do with these "new citizens" they ended up with when fighting two wars of self-deffense (because remember, Palestinians and Israeli Arabs are two seperate things - sadly). It's taken a hell of a lot of blood on both sides, but people are finally acknowledging that the best solution is not to ignore the existence of the side you don't want to exist, but rather for both sides to live side-by-side.

As someone whose family has long been involved in politics, both US and Israeli, and has spent time there talking to people on both sides, I cna say that the Eyptian sponsored talks right now are the best bet. It's the Middle East making peace in the Middle East. That's what is needed - no accusations of bias can be made.

I'm doubly heartened that despite two attacks in Jerusalem in the last month, Israel has kept the cease-fire and is showing they're commited to peace. The Abbas backed goverment seems willing, and eventually Hamas will come to the table to do more than spout threats.

There will always be extemists, but I think we're closer to peace then we've been in a long, long time.

[Typo Lad]

Oh, and also... on the topic of nukes.

Israel isn't a signator of any such treaty. As such, even if they admitted they had the nukes, they're not impacted. That's the odd thing about International Law - it only applies to a nation of they acknowledged it. Most nations use this dodge.

Further, Iran can saber-rattle all they want, but the fact is, no-one's nuking Israel. You'd immediately earn the enmity of of any allies you had. Plus, there's the fact that Israel is so dang small that you'd also basically be bombing Egypt or Lebanon.

Not to mention fallout.

Nukes are a strawman.

[Typo Lad]

Anyway, the cameras - it's a great idea.

I'm quite bewildered to see someone putting a tent on farmland and that this means the IDF are stopping the farmer from using his farmland. What logic is going on there?
It's not the IDF as an orginization. It's people in IDF service (mandatory) with Settler views who are using their uniform and weapons to intimidate people.

The sooner the walls go up to keep those Kachist creeps behind it, the better.

[TCJohnson]

...

Serpentor?

...pst...ya got a Cobra avatar....Serpentor was the leader of Cobra for a while....:D

[ShaunN]

Dear Friends,

Just a couple of quick comments - I tend to agree that Israel should not have been created. It was obvious from the beginning that Israel was being created on land already occupied by another people who were not simply going to vanish into the mass of Arabs (which is what a lot of Zionist leaders hoped and assumed would happen) and that the problems caused by this unjust appropriation of land would last for decades to come.

That being said, Israel now exists and several generations of Israelis have been born in the country. They have a right to be there, even if their ancestors did not. This fact in no way invalidates the claims of the Palestinians or the reality of the injustices done to them, but it is a reality that must be accommodated. The Palestinians have to accept this new reality. But, ultimately, Israeli Jews will also need to accept the fundamental injustice on which they state was founded and make amends - including accepting the legitimacy of Palestinian anger.

In the end, the best solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a binational state, with both people sharing the same land. Since that won't happen anytime soon, the next best solution is a two-state solution. Since Israel keeps building settlements on Palestinian land, I don't know how soon that will happen, but it will occur one day. Even after that happens, however, the fallout from the past 6 decades will persist. After all, Palestinian society has been deeply warped and damaged by the conflict (as has Israeli society, but there is a difference between being the oppressor and being the oppressed). Like native communities shunted on to reservations in Canada, the US and Australia, the Palestinians will have a long way to go in rebuilding their society into something workable.

Sincerely,

Shaun

[Charles RB]

It's not the IDF as an orginization. It's people in IDF service (mandatory) with Settler views who are using their uniform and weapons to intimidate people.

Ahhh - so those guys are not acting on official orders (unless their immediate superior was also a pro-settler abusing the uniform)?

Since they've been caught on camera though, are they likely to get told off/told to stop by the higher-ups though?

[beetlebum]

I'm going to get flamed for this, but Israel is evil. I don't have any problems at all with jewish people, but the nation is and it's government and military and whole policy structure are vile hateful filth that should be dissolved and cursed. What they have done and continue to do is abominable and unforgivable.

If I were running the world I'd make Jerusalem an independent, neutral city-state open to all, give the bulk of current Israel back to it's native people, and make a new jewish state in eastern europe somewhere, you know, where the actual jews who were persecuted and genocided came from. Get them the fuck out of the middle east for good. Let the hardliners and Likudniks keep Tel Aviv and a reasonable area around it, with all their nukes and military and let them stay and fight if they want, let the peace-loving majority of israeli jews have a place of their own out of the desert in a place where things actually grow and they can live more like they did before Hitler displaced them from their homes in europe.

That's what should have been done in the damned first place, they should have gotten east germany instead of the soviets, or a portion of both sides should have been given to them. The aggressor should have been the one to cede territory, not someone else entirely who was never involved in the atrocity to begin with. All that did was create new victims and a new cycle of violence we're still suffering with to this day.

Speaking of being incorrect...

Logic has no place in your world, now does it?

So you would have the whole entire nation of Israel moved to East Germany?

After the Allies defeated the Axis, the country west of the Oder-Neisse line was divided into four occupation zones for administrative purposes.

Allowing the Soviets to occupy East Germany was a crucial move, one that (unfortunately) had to be made.

So--pending that the scenario you proposed came to fruition--how do you propose that the Allies would keep the Soviets from occupying East Germany, without resorting to military means, after they had already endured a military conflict?

And why the sudden obsession with imposing things on the people of Eastern Europe? Do you think that they would willingly acquiesce to their land being partitioned in order to create a new nation?

I suspect that Tito, Kadar, Ranković and the other Soviet puppets who were installed to oversee their respective countries would not have been too happy with that idea, either.

Although Ceausescu (Romania) did defy the Soviets by establishing diplomatic relations with the Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany) and by continuing relations with Israel following the 'Six-Day War', I doubt he would have welcomed this proposal with open arms.

And not to mention what the reaction would have been like amongst the respective populaces.

I adhere to the belief that had what you proposed actually happened, it would have further strained already tense relations, in an already volatile region.

Take the Albanian-Serbian conflict. The two ethnic groups have been at odds with each other since the arrival of the Slavic populations in the Balkan peninsula, around 600 A.C. Granted, Tito did keep a lid on things while he was still alive, but after he died, war broke out. Knowing what we know, do you still think it would have been wise to create a new nation state there?

As was pointed out to you earlier--if we were to have created a Jewish state somewhere in Eastern Europe--all of the turmoil and conflict that is currently happening in the nation of Israel would still occur; albeit in a different locale.

Your beliefs are, once again, based on your own, priori synthetic assumptions, and non-epistemic considerations.

And it fails to correspond to what is actual reality.

[Typo Lad]

Just a couple of quick comments - I tend to agree that Israel should not have been created. It was obvious from the beginning that Israel was being created on land already occupied by another people who were not simply going to vanish into the mass of Arabs (which is what a lot of Zionist leaders hoped and assumed would happen) and that the problems caused by this unjust appropriation of land would last for decades to come.

That's an oversimplification, but not too far off.

It's more an issue of British Colonialism than Zionism, at least at first.

That being said, Israel now exists and several generations of Israelis have been born in the country. They have a right to be there, even if their ancestors did not. This fact in no way invalidates the claims of the Palestinians or the reality of the injustices done to them, but it is a reality that must be accommodated.

Um, the thing is, you're acting like Israel is the only the only nation being unjust to the Palestinians. They're "refugees" not just because Israel won't have them (and several PMs have tried to, for the record), but because when they did try to leave, they were shot at by other nations.

The Palestinians have to accept this new reality.

Again, to be fair, most do. The problem is the USSR used the PLO as a stalking horse for decades and created a culture of leaders getting rich of the blood of their people. Arafat did it, Abbas did it, and now Hamas is becoming enmeshed in that culture.

But, ultimately, Israeli Jews will also need to accept the fundamental injustice on which they state was founded and make amends - including accepting the legitimacy of Palestinian anger.

Again, Israel is more than Jews. When people act like it is, they negate the contribution of thousands of Israeli Arabs, not to mention the Christian population.

In the end, the best solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a binational state, with both people sharing the same land.

No, it's really not. Like the UK's 'Trans-Jordan", that assumes a melting pot approach that just won't work.

Since that won't happen anytime soon, the next best solution is a two-state solution.

No, it just is.

Since Israel keeps building settlements on Palestinian land

Israel is not doing it. The settlers are building there illegally. Hence the wall. Please don't blame the entire government for the Kach nutbags.

After all, Palestinian society has been deeply warped and damaged by the conflict (as has Israeli society, but there is a difference between being the oppressor and being the oppressed). Like native communities shunted on to reservations in Canada, the US and Australia, the Palestinians will have a long way to go in rebuilding their society into something workable.

There's oppresion on both sides.

The best thing the two nations could to is become fiscally dependent on each other. That's what made peace with Egypt (border crossings) and Jordan (the Salt Works). Once you have a joint economy, you can't be killing each other,

Ahhh - so those guys are not acting on official orders (unless their immediate superior was also a pro-settler abusing the uniform)?

Since they've been caught on camera though, are they likely to get told off/told to stop by the higher-ups though?

At least one soldier has already been brought up on charges, and there are talks of serious reprecutions in general.

[kitty_tc_69]

As was pointed out to you earlier--if we were to have created a Jewish state somewhere in Eastern Europe--all of the turmoil and conflict that is currently happening in the nation of Israel would still occur; albeit in a different locale.

Would it be better, worse, or about the same as what we have now do you think? I still think that the nation that committed the aggression is the one that should have ceded the territory. Yeah, you'd still have a problem getting people to accept it, but there's also an equity there as well that would serve to foster a sense of legitimacy.

Again, I recognize that there's no good solution. Please read my second post.

[Typo Lad]

I still think that the nation that committed the aggression is the one that should have ceded the territory. .

So... England then?

Also, how far back do we go on that? Do we only apply that to Israel?

[TCJohnson]

So... England then?

Also, how far back do we go on that? Do we only apply that to Israel?

: starts packing his things to move back to Scotland where his ancestors came from...leaves the keys on the kitchen table for the indians with instructions on how to change the air filters on the heat pump and how to work the microwave :

[beetlebum]

The whole damned thing is a mess, I think that much we can all agree on. And after reading article after article for years about all the atrocities committed by the state of Israel and it's government and military for so many years, it's hard not to be angry about the issue. They get preferential treatment thanks to America's intervention on their behalf in the UN, they get a free pass for the kind of human rights violations that other nations like China get lambasted for --and worse. They even get a blind eye turned to the fact that they possess a massive nuclear arsenal in violation of the Non-Proliferation treaty, all the while they (with American support as usual) get to rattle the sabre at Iran for allegedly having ambitions for nukes of their own. It's infuriating, to say the least.

I don't mean to sound like a consequentialist here, but most of the big powers have committed human rights violations, and have gotten away with them.

As this link shows us (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_Nations_resolutions_concerning_Isra el), there have been many UN resolutions concerning the Nation of Israel, including one that equated Zionism to racism.

However, I do sympathise with your sentiments to a certain extent. There should be outrage at the mistreatment of any human being, regardless of whatever their background is.


I'm well aware that most of the Israeli population are good people and want peace. They are to be commended for this and encouraged and supported wherever and however possible. Grace under pressure indeed. Unfortunately, their government does not reflect the goodness in their hearts --a fact that no doubt pains them greatly.

There are bad elements in every government. Why are you painting the Israeli government with a broad brush?

That's why I wish it were possible to just make a new spot for those people in eastern europe, or that it had been done in the first place. Sure, you can point out problems and poke holes in it, it's sure as hell not a perfect solution --but what we've got sure as hell isn't working either. Ideally (and I know, pipe dream) we could get those peace-loving good people their own plot of land outside the middle east where there are trees and fertile soil and something to build on that could sustain them. I don't think they'll find it stuck out in the damned desert, that's for sure.



Again, why are you so obsessed with partitioning land in Eastern Europe? Given the ethnic tensions that I just mentioned; along with several other emergent factors-- including Alexander Lukashenko (authoritarian president, Belarus), and an Eastern Bloc that is still trying to re-cover from the downfall of the Soviet Union, placing Israel in the midst of that hot mess would only make things worse.

Would it be better, worse, or about the same as what we have now do you think? I still think that the nation that committed the aggression is the one that should have ceded the territory. Yeah, you'd still have a problem getting people to accept it, but there's also an equity there as well that would serve to foster a sense of legitimacy.

Again, I recognize that there's no good solution. Please read my second post.

I just did. And I notice that you didn't address the rest of my post. I realise that it's just a pipe dream, but still; it's one with many flaws, and those flaws should be highlighted.

And yes, I am poking holes in your theory.

So... England then?

Also, how far back do we go on that? Do we only apply that to Israel?

I guess so.

[ShaunN]

Dear Typo Lad,

I agree with some of your points and disagree with others. I agree that many countries have done injustice to the Palestinians, but the primary injustice was the creation of Israel on their land. Jewish nationalism required that the Palestinians be displaced, or else there could not be a Jewish, democratic state in what became Israel. So, they were displaced, with the tacit blessing of the Western world.

Israel is, primarily, a Jewish states. There is a significant Arab population, but they are third-class citizens and find themselves caught between two worlds. They are certainly not regarded as full citizens by most of the Jewish population of Israel and their inability to serve in the military means that many of the privileges of Israeli citizenship are denied to them.

Finally, I don't think we should pretend that the settler movement has not had the blessing, explicit or implicit, of most Israeli governments for the past few decades. The greatest increase in Jewish settlement in the OT happened after the signing of the Oslo Peace Accord. Admittedly, much of that happened under a Likud government, but even Ehud Barak (for political reasons) gave his blessing to a huge increase in Jewish settllement even as he was trying to work out a final peace deal. A great many Israelis may be opposed to those settlements, but the government allows them and then sends in the military to protect them.

Today's NYT has an article on some more houses that may be built on a settlement deep in the WB. The housing is just waiting for final approval from the PM. That may not happen, but the fact that it might (and probably will) and that it depends on government approval says a lot.

Take care,

Shaun

[ShaunN]

Dear Typo Lad,

Hi! Just one other follow up point: the best solution to the conflict is a binational state. It is the most just solution, recognizing the legitimate claims to the same land from both sides, without privileging either. I don't think this will happen because we do not live in a utopian world and the power of nationalism on both sides makes this solution impossible, at least for now. The second best solution is the two-state solution. This is the one that will probably, eventually, occur. But it will still leave the Palestinians in a deeply disadvantaged position that they will have difficulty overcoming.

Sincerely,

Shaun

[DungeonmasterJim]

: starts packing his things to move back to Scotland where his ancestors came from...leaves the keys on the kitchen table for the indians with instructions on how to change the air filters on the heat pump and how to work the microwave :


Darn it, beaten by both TC Johson and TypoLad to the punch.

DM Jim

[ShaunN]

Dear Beetlebum,

Hi! I agree with your points - from a practical perspective, creating an Israeli state in Europe would have led to its own set of problems. However, that fact does not make the creation of an Israeli state on Arab land and at the cost of displacing the Arab inhabitants any more just. One way or the other, the creation of a new, religious/ethnically based state in a world where all the land was occupied would have led to problems. And there is a hypothetical case to be made that Germans, as the people responsible for the Holocaust (accepting that Israel was a direct product of the Holocaust) should be the people to pay the price for their government's actions. But, in practical terms, this could not have worked, for all of the reasons that you specify.

The reason that it was possible to displace the Palestinians, however, was because they were poor, brown, predominantly Muslim and without powerful supporters. They were regarded by the Europeans who took their land from them as inherently inferior. Indeed, Churchill is explicit about this - he compares the Palestinians to the "red Indians" or "Australian Aborigines" who also lost their lands to "superior civilizations" and says that he can mourn for the Palestinians no more than he would for either of those other two inferior groups of people.

At the end of the day, the only thing that matters here is that Israel does exist and the Palestinians must come to terms with this and accept it. As I said to a Palestinian friend of mine once, the Palestinians need to choose between justice or peace, because they are not going to get both.

Sincerely,

Shaun

[kitty_tc_69]

How about I just cut back to

I recognize that there's no good solution.

and leave it at that?

I do want to add that ShaunN is making some very good points and is clearly speaking to my position on the issue better than I am.

Also, I don't single out Israel's government for criticism, nor give free passes to my own or other governments for their crimes. I could make quite a list just focusing on America, but that's not on topic for this thread. But please, don't think I only see Israel's flaws and turn a blind eye to others.

[beetlebum]

Dear Typo Lad,

I agree with some of your points and disagree with others. I agree that many countries have done injustice to the Palestinians, but the primary injustice was the creation of Israel on their land. Jewish nationalism required that the Palestinians be displaced, or else there could not be a Jewish, democratic state in what became Israel. So, they were displaced, with the tacit blessing of the Western world.

To back up one of Typo's points, the Arab League countries have pledged a total of 215 million dollars to the Palestinians, for FY 2008. And--aside form Jordan -- most of the said nations are not willing to take in large numbers of Palestinian refugees, this despite the fact that they often use the Israel-Palestine conflict as a scapegoat for their failures.

As for the 'blessings from the West', George Marshall was actually against the partition of the Palestinian territories, and made his views known to Harry Truman (though he did later acquiesce). Loy Henderson, director of the State Department's Near East Agency, wrote to Secretary of State James Byrnes that the United States would lose its moral prestige in the Middle East if it supported Jewish aspirations in Palestine.

The Joint Chiefs of Staff--at the time--argued in a memorandum entitled "The Problem of Palestine" that the partition of Palestine into Jewish and Arab states would enable the Soviet Union to replace the US and Britain in the region, and would endanger our access to the region's vital oil supplies.

Then Secretary of Defence James Forrestal said, at a meeting of the National Security Council, that any serious attempt to implement partition in Palestine would set in motion events that would result in at least a partial mobilization of US armed forces.

I'm still amazed that--despite all of the opposition--Harry Truman went on to recognise the creation of the state of Israel.

Israel is, primarily, a Jewish states. There is a significant Arab population, but they are third-class citizens and find themselves caught between two worlds. They are certainly not regarded as full citizens by most of the Jewish population of Israel and their inability to serve in the military means that many of the privileges of Israeli citizenship are denied to them.

Israeli Arabs have served in the IDF. Among them are Major General Hussain Fares, commander of Israel's border police, and Major General Yosef Mishlav, head of the Israeli Home Front Command and current Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories. Israeli Arabs have also served in the Knesset, and a few were appointed to the country's Supreme Court. in 2001, Salah Tarif, a Druze Arab, was appointed a member of Sharon's cabinet without a portfolio.

However, despite the improvements, Israel still has a way to go in terms of how it treats its Arab citizens. That we agree on.

Finally, I don't think we should pretend that the settler movement has not had the blessing, explicit or implicit, of most Israeli governments for the past few decades. The greatest increase in Jewish settlement in the OT happened after the signing of the Oslo Peace Accord. Admittedly, much of that happened under a Likud government, but even Ehud Barak (for political reasons) gave his blessing to a huge increase in Jewish settlement even as he was trying to work out a final peace deal. A great many Israelis may be opposed to those settlements, but the government allows them and then sends in the military to protect them.

Today's NYT has an article on some more houses that may be built on a settlement deep in the WB. The housing is just waiting for final approval from the PM. That may not happen, but the fact that it might (and probably will) and that it depends on government approval says a lot.


Originally, the official Israeli policy was to deny any Jewish settlement or even Jewish resettlement of specific locations where Jews had resided (in the territories) that was until the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. Many attempts were made by Gush Emunim to establish outposts or resettle former Jewish areas, and initially the Israeli government forcibly disbanded these settlements.

That changed over time. The Israeli government has sent the IDF to protect some settlers, as well as provide them with other forms of aid. The lobbies for the settlers are strong--both in the US and Israel.

However, Israel dismantled some settlement stations. (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4176/is_20030610/ai_n14547380)

I personally, would have all of the settlements dismantled, as well. It just makes sense to do so (hard-liners be damned).

Dear Beetlebum,

Hi! I agree with your points - from a practical perspective, creating an Israeli state in Europe would have led to its own set of problems. However, that fact does not make the creation of an Israeli state on Arab land and at the cost of displacing the Arab inhabitants any more just. One way or the other, the creation of a new, religious/ethnically based state in a world where all the land was occupied would have led to problems. And there is a hypothetical case to be made that Germans, as the people responsible for the Holocaust (accepting that Israel was a direct product of the Holocaust) should be the people to pay the price for their government's actions. But, in practical terms, this could not have worked, for all of the reasons that you specify.

The reason that it was possible to displace the Palestinians, however, was because they were poor, brown, predominantly Muslim and without powerful supporters. They were regarded by the Europeans who took their land from them as inherently inferior. Indeed, Churchill is explicit about this- he compares the Palestinians to the "red Indians" or "Australian Aborigines" who also lost their lands to "superior civilizations" and says that he can mourn for the Palestinians no more than he would for either of those other two inferior groups of people.

At the end of the day, the only thing that matters here is that Israel does exist and the Palestinians must come to terms with this and accept it. As I said to a Palestinian friend of mine once, the Palestinians need to choose between justice or peace, because they are not going to get both.

Sincerely,

Shaun

I agree with most of what you said. However, I did not mean for my post so come across as a justification for Israel's creation at the expense of the Palestinians.

I have friends of mine who are Palestinian, and I am quite sympathetic to their plight.

[ShaunN]

Dear Beetlebum,

To just follow up on your first point: at the time of the creation of Israel, there were a lot of Westerners who were opposed to the state's creation, precisely because they saw the likely consequences. In Canada, one of the foremost diplomats of the time, a woman whose name I forget at the moment, predicted "50 years of conflict". She underestimated. But there were also a lot of Westerners who were in favour of creating Israel, often because of their Christian beliefs and/or their personal associations with Zionist leaders. The reason the British had vacillated over the issue had a lot to do with their inability to square the circle of giving the Jews a homeland in the face of the powerful opposition from the Arabs. After the Holocaust, however, European/Western guilt was enough to overcome these objections. As I said, the poor, weak, mostly Muslim Palestinians were made to pay the price of Western guilt.

It may be true that some Arabs have served in the Israeli military. The vast majority, however, do not. And while there are certainly Arab members of the Knesset, it's only been in the past 5 or so years that any have been given any cabinet posts. The Labour Party has counted on the Arab bloc voting with them, given that it has few other options.

I think, at the end of the day, Israel's problem is that it was a colonial state that was created at just the time that colonialism was going out of style. It got caught in a world in the process of a profound normative shift. Ironically, some of those shifts were brought about by the Holocaust itself - for example, the growing international focus on human rights - and those are some of the same values that are operating against Israel's actions now.

Take care,

Shaun

[ShaunN]

Dear Friends,

Here is Nicholas Kristof's most recent column, which addresses some of the things we've been discussing. Note the comment by one reader which basically says that Jews are wonderful and advanced and Palestinians are savages. Reminiscent of my paraphrasing of Winston Churchill in a past note and a sentiment that underlines the "culture-centric" (for lack of a better term) aspects of this conflict.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/24/opinion/24kristof.html?em&ex=1217131200&en=7845ac1e55badb6c&ei=5087%0A

Sincerely,

Shaun

[Typo Lad]

I just woke up, and will comment more when I get a chance, but I have a big day at work and some house stuff to do. I'm no ignoring you though Sean, and wanted you to know that.

A binational state woould have maybe worked 60 years ago, but at the time, the majority had no issue with Arabs staying in the country. That's why there are Israeli Arabs in the first place, and as BB points out, they do okay. They do far, far better than Israeli Christians or Etheopian immigrants.

Sadly, the minority had more guns.

Which is a good distilation of the problem today.

Anyway, off to work

[Charles RB]

Would it be better, worse, or about the same as what we have now do you think?

Worse, because it would be ocurring in a war-ravaged continent with the Cold War beginning, nations with nuclear weaponry would now be directly involved, and you'd have all this mess from the War and Holocaust making things worse. You think Israel and Palestine is bad, imagine what the fuck would happen if you replace Palestine with half of Germany in 1945 - I really wouldn't want to be a non-Jewish German living in this new Israel, would you? Nor would I like to see how well reducing anti-Semitism and destroying Nazism in Western Europe would work here.

And that's just putting it in East Germany. Put it somewhere further east in Europe, you've just got this new nation surrounded by Soviet states. The chances of conflict and international incidents are high. On top of that, whereas Palestinians complained "why are we getting this? WE didn't commit the Holocaust!", you'd have instead "why are we having to give up land to make up for Nazi atrocities when the Nazis did them to us too!" in the case of quite a few nations. And then there's existing ethnic tensions in the area...

[Typo Lad]

I've had the day from heck, but Beeb and Charles basically covered everything.

Turning back the clock isn't an option. Facts on the ground are what matters, and ignoring them is how the situation got this bad.