|
Crowsbeak posted:
They could, and not to the opposition you'd like to see with more representation in the Knesset.
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 21:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 10:34 |
|
|
Polls published in Maariv predict Likud would win 22 seats if the elections were to take place right now, they currently hold 18. It doesn't really matter either way, every possible coalition would have the exact same policies when it comes to Palestine.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 21:47
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:
i'm not israeli (thank god) but judging from the polls, MIGF is right, if trends hold, then if Likud loses seats at all it will be to other people in the Blood Gargle Coalition
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:George Washington is dead. Dead men do not spin graves; that takes parts and labor and has numerous costs associated with it. Far cheaper to monumentalize than it is to continuously spin a grave.  ... ...What precisely is your gimmick?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 22:03
|
|
|
Lustful Man Hugs posted:
typically, word salad
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:Polls published in Maariv predict Likud would win 22 seats if the elections were to take place right now, they currently hold 18. It doesn't really matter either way, every possible coalition would have the exact same policies when it comes to Palestine. Would they? Judging by what Ynet and the Times of Israel have been posting, and by his manoeuvring over the nation-state bill, Netanyahu seems to be trying to ditch the relative moderates in his coalition and tie himself tighter to the far-right zealots. If that plan goes through, I can see Israel's Palestinian policy getting even more brutal and far less apologetic for/euphemistic about said brutality.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 22:07
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:
Lapid's Yesh Atid and Livni's Hatnua are likely to crash and burn. I reckon about 2/3 of those votes will be split between Haavoda and Likud with the rest going to Liberman and Bennet. But I'm an optimist  .
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
Lustful Man Hugs posted:
 The ongoing conflicts aren't about land. Specifically, they're about whats underneath salty water. Fresh water and land have little to do with those interests, apart from distracting from production and providing perceptions of instability to opeeators and staff.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 23:14
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:
Right. Well, I guess aparthied and settlement campaigns are just a ruse.....
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 00:06
|
|
|
Darth Walrus posted:Would they? Judging by what Ynet and the Times of Israel have been posting, and by his manoeuvring over the nation-state bill, Netanyahu seems to be trying to ditch the relative moderates in his coalition and tie himself tighter to the far-right zealots. If that plan goes through, I can see Israel's Palestinian policy getting even more brutal and far less apologetic for/euphemistic about said brutality. What cause is there to think that this would actually make any difference? There's also this thing where just cause parties seem more right leaning or messianic there's no actual precedent for leftist leaning governments being any more lenient or progressive on the Palestinian issue, Bibi's current regime was pretty drat ruthless, did Livni and Lapid do anything to stop him? Did Livni do anything to stop Olmert during Cast Lead? Bibi is already doing exactly what he wants to do, this 'try to stall, when you can't stall, destabilize the region and kill thousands of innocents' strategy is likely to remain the MO for whatever regime comes next.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 00:59
|
|
|
Baudolino posted:Discussing who is the most to blame is really not very interesting. Instead I would like to see a discussion of the worst case scenario : Neither the one-state or the two-state solution occurs and Israel Is able to retain domination over all the occupied territories indefinitely despite facing permanent revolt and international sanctions. Eventually the Palestinian citizenship act will be passed, 50 years later the Palestinian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act will be passed, and eventually you will be able to travel from settled Israeli land to semi-autonomously governed Palestinian land without a checkpoint. The Palestinians will have been beaten into submission, and will care more about scraping out a meager existence than continuing to fight with Israel. And all this only a century or two after the US did it:  Don't do what we did Israel. It was horrible then (and now) too. 
fade5 fucked around with this message at 01:31 on Nov 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 01:26
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:
israel palestine waterworld
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 01:53
|
|
|
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/11/israel-fm-supports-paying-arabs-leave-2014112814625150832.htmlquote:Israel's foreign minister says he supports paying Arab citizens to leave the country. http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/inpictures/2014/11/pictures-when-school-illegal-2014112514056177426.html quote:Khan al Ahmar, West Bank, Palestine - The Khan al-Ahmar School serves the children of the Jahalin Bedouin community in the West Bank and has been declared illegal by Israeli authorities. It is now facing possible demolition. CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 02:11 on Nov 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 02:08
|
|
|
This is from the Middle East Megathread:TheImmigrant posted:Don't know if this is the place for anecdotes, but I'll drop one anyway. I just came back from a weeklong visit to Lebanon. Spent most of it in Beirut (one hell of a city), but made a trip out to the Beqaa' to see the ruins at Baalbek. I was expecting it, but still surprised by how mainstream Hizbollah is out there. In Zahle and especially Baalbek town, they cruise around in unmarked black SUVs, occasionally conferring with the Lebanese army, who have checkpoints every few miles there. If that hypocritical oaf ever comes back to this or any future thread whining about our anti-Israeli bias or whatnot, remind him that he literally supported Hezbollah financially and boasted about it, so he's in practice one of the most ardent anti-Israeli in the forum.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 04:21
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:If that hypocritical oaf ever comes back to this or any future thread whining about our anti-Israeli bias or whatnot, remind him that he literally supported Hezbollah financially and boasted about it, so he's in practice one of the most ardent anti-Israeli in the forum. gently caress israelis, only a subhuman wouldn't be anti-Israeli at this point
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 04:39
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:lmao Hey, I'm an Israeli, so gently caress you too. (Although I am often told to go live in Gaza with those loving Palestinians I love so much, so make of that what you will.  )
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 04:43
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Hey, I'm an Israeli, so gently caress you too.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 04:47
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:Renounce your citizenship and move anywhere else in the first world I already live somewhere else in the world and I'm not renouncing my citizenship because, with my views, that could very well mean not seeing my friends or family over there ever again.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 04:49
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Hey, I'm an Israeli, so gently caress you too. Well have some solidarity from a US citizen who wishes that we didn't have a combination of terrible foreign and domestic policies since forever. این نیز بگذرد لا شيء يدوم גם זה יעבור This too shall pass.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 04:51
|
|
|
syscall girl posted:Well have some solidarity from a US citizen who wishes that we didn't have a combination of terrible foreign and domestic policies since forever. I'm just glad I have US citizenship, too, so it wasn't too much of a procedure to move out. I wish I could just transplant everybody else out of there, but a lot of my family calls it home and will go down with the ship. Anyway, I'm going to stop now, because a lifetime of my whining is nothing compared to one day of a child growing up in the West Bank.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 04:52
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:I already live somewhere else in the world and I'm not renouncing my citizenship because, with my views, that could very well mean not seeing my friends or family over there ever again. well then at least don't shame people for being anti-israeli when its literally the moral stance to take
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 04:53
|
|
|
syscall girl posted:Well have some solidarity from a US citizen who wishes that we didn't have a combination of terrible foreign and domestic policies since forever. If we hadn't stood behind the Israeli Government, a lot of things could have been stopped, including a lot of Israels settlement building...
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 04:57
|
|
|
Lustful Man Hugs posted:
It was described once as "Democratic policy analyst".
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 05:06
|
|
|
computer parts posted:It was described once as "Democratic policy analyst". Rahm Emmanuel with a hard-on for Judaism and Israel. That may be redundant. I rather like responding with a little Napoleon. Now that's a guy who knows how to get things done.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 05:07
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:well then at least don't shame people for being anti-israeli when its literally the moral stance to take I'm not shaming him for being anti-Israeli. I'm shaming him for trolling pro-Israeli views here and then ending up nonchalantly giving money to Hezbollah. Another good post to hold him to would be this one: TheImmigrant posted:That's nice. You mad that I flew into Beirut too? Again, the context is that this person came into the last I/P thread several times posting pro-Israel bullshit, calling everyone here the Che Brigade, wondering why the hell anyone could sympathize with the Palestinians, and suggesting murderous alternatives to already lovely Israeli actions. Oh, and these two are the real kickers: TheImmigrant posted:When discussing I-P issues, it is important to browbeat into silence anyone who comes from the region. Only armchair revolutionaries in Beaver Rectum, Missouri, or Scuzzlethorpe, Puddingshire can understand. TheImmigrant posted:You are aware that Israel is still in a state of war with neighboring Lebanon and Syria, inter alia, and that Hizbullah controls southern Lebanon? These are legitimate defense issues for Israel. Your proposal is merely a disingenuous suggestion for national suicide.  CommieGIR posted:If we hadn't stood behind the Israeli Government, a lot of things could have been stopped, including a lot of Israels settlement building... The history of progress as far as Israeli-Palestinian/Arab relations after the State's formation go is pretty much the history of American administration willing to exert actual pressure.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 05:10
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Well, considering il duce pope is officially called: Is there anything you're not wrong about? The only title the pope holds that was ever held by an Augustus is "Pontifex Maximus", which was transferred to the Bishop of Rome by Honorius at the prompting of Ambrose of Milan so as to remove any justification for the argument that the emperor was the protector of old Roman pagan beliefs. You may as well say Charlemagne was mentioned in the Bible because he assumed a few Roman titles someone dug up from under a collapsed roof in Italy. The larger point being: don't accuse people of not having critical thinking skills by launching into an anecdote that has no basis in reality. paranoid randroid fucked around with this message at 07:16 on Nov 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 07:05
|
|
|
syscall girl posted:Well have some solidarity from a US citizen who wishes that we didn't have a combination of terrible foreign and domestic policies since forever. Hey, that's my favorite story about Solomon.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 07:43
|
|
|
paranoid randroid posted:Is there anything you're not wrong about? The only title the pope holds that was ever held by an Augustus is "Pontifex Maximus", which was transferred to the Bishop of Rome by Honorius at the prompting of Ambrose of Milan so as to remove any justification for the argument that the emperor was the protector of old Roman pagan beliefs. You may as well say Charlemagne was mentioned in the Bible because he assumed a few Roman titles someone dug up from under a collapsed roof in Italy. I think he was going for Primate of Italy, which you could translate (very badly) as head of Italy, but 1) even when titles mattered it was very clearly not a secular title and only refers to the Pope's position as top Cardinal of Italy, and 2) there really wasn't an equivalent title claimed by any Roman emperor. The closest thing is the Byzantine emperor crowned Odoacer "Duke of Italy" in 476 but before then I don't think there was any title for being the ruler of "Italy".
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 08:23
|
|
|
It was a stupid point to make anyway, since it involves interpretation and a chain of logic that had to be debated and established by religious scholars - exactly like how the furthest mosque had to be debated to be determined to be in Jerusalem. It was especially stupid to say it was determined to be in Jerusalem because it was politically convenient, as though that invalidated the interpretation, when almost every part of religious history for every faith revolves around politically-minded decisions and interpretations. The very existence of the Pope and the Catholic Church came about mainly to fulfill a political need, yet we treat it with respect as an article of faith for Catholics, and likewise the belief of modern Muslims that Jerusalem is a holy city referenced in the Quran should be respected. As for "we know your holy book better than you," that's just a wildly stupid and offensive claim for a representative of one world religion to make to another. Dolash fucked around with this message at 08:55 on Nov 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 08:52
|
|
|
Regardless of whether Jerusalem is in the Quran, it's in the Bible, so the entire city should be purged of its inhabitants and resettled exclusively by Christians. That's the logic behind looking for that city's name in holy books, isn't it?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 09:56
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Regardless of whether Jerusalem is in the Quran, it's in the Bible, so the entire city should be purged of its inhabitants and resettled exclusively by Christians. Well no actually, Christianity is rather progressive and spiritual about these things, Paul writes that Jerusalem is a concept that exists in one's heart, not some city built on a hill.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 11:42
|
|
|
What does everyone think should be done with Al-Aqsa under some hypothetical peace deal? In my opinion while it should stay in Muslim hands, there should be allowances made allowing Jews to visit and pray and to access the Temple Mount as much as possible without interfering with the running of the mosque. This should probably include control over land beneath Al-Aqsa as long as it doesn't interfere with the mosque as I've always thought "Jews are going to undermine and collapse Al-Aqsa if we give them access" to be a fanciful narrative. While I can fully understand not wanting to relinquish any control or give any access to Israelis in their status as occupiers who are dispossessing the Palestinian population, it is a holy place of Judaism and if there is going to be any attempt at real reconciliation I think accommodations would need to be made as part of a peace deal. team overhead smash fucked around with this message at 11:49 on Nov 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 11:46
|
|
|
Jews are not even supposed to ascend the temple mount until the coming of the Moshiach, this is a complete non-issue outside the minds of provocateurs, politicians and doomsday prophets.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 11:49
|
|
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:Jews are not even supposed to ascend the temple mount until the coming of the Moshiach, this is a complete non-issue outside the minds of provocateurs, politicians and doomsday prophets. I know that's the Ultra-orthodox position, but it isn't the case for all Jews and using the arguement of "Well your religious beliefs don't accord with what I believe your religious beliefs should be so they're wrong and unimportant" seems to simple be exactly what MIGF was doing with Jerusalem and the Quran, which we all disputed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 11:53
|
|
|
Judaism in Israel is a centralized religion, the Orthodox rabbinate makes official decrees, true that there are various sects and sometimes different interpretations but for 90% of practicing Jews the rabbinate is the authority when it comes to these things, they say that on a certain spot on the temple mount there's this spot called 'the holy of holies', where the ark of the covenant used to be and that only the high priest may enter that spot, since no one knows where that spot was precisely it's just flat out forbidden to go up there until Moshiach comes down from heaven with blueprints for the third temple. You'd be hard pressed to find actual practicing jews who don't believe that, there is a minority of weirdos who want to go there and sacrifice animals during the high holidays, those fall into the category of provocateurs in my opinion. There really is nothing 'to be done' with the mosque, it's there to stay. If anything this is only another point that demonstrates why Israel shouldn't be allowed to control Jerusalem, I've always favored the UN controlled city idea from the 1947 partition plan.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 12:01
|
|
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:Judaism in Israel is a centralized religion, the Orthodox rabbinate makes official decrees, true that there are various sects and sometimes different interpretations but for 90% of practicing Jews the rabbinate is the authority when it comes to these things, they say that on a certain spot on the temple mount there's this spot called 'the holy of holies', where the ark of the covenant used to be and that only the high priest may enter that spot, since no one knows where that spot was precisely it's just flat out forbidden to go up there until Moshiach comes down from heaven with blueprints for the third temple. You'd be hard pressed to find actual practicing jews who don't believe that, there is a minority of weirdos who want to go there and sacrifice animals during the high holidays, those fall into the category of provocateurs in my opinion. So it is okay to ignore a sizable chunk of the population as long as they form a minority of their overall religious group? Although I don't trust it completely because it was comissioned by a pro-access organisation and I am open to the idea that it could have some bias which has inflated the results so I'm trying to find more polls, the only poll I've found so far (Analysed by Haaretz here) shows a majority of Jews wishing to visit the Temple Mount with this tendency being strongest amongst practising non-ultra-orthodox and secular Jews (60%+) but even 20% of ultra-orthodox jews still want to go. This is pretty much as I'd expect. Putting aside the problem that you're ignoring those Jews who specifically don't follow the teachings of the chief rabbinate as if they're unimportant, you're left with the problem that just because a religion has a centralised authority that they should technically all follow perfectly and exactly, that doesn't necessarily represent their actual opinion of how they want to live their life and practice their faith. That is what is being represented in the poll. team overhead smash fucked around with this message at 12:43 on Nov 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 12:40
|
|
|
team overhead smash posted:What does everyone think should be done with Al-Aqsa under some hypothetical peace deal? Re: digging under al-Aqsa, it's not just about 'collapsing' it, which is fanciful. It's about archaeology and what might be under there. I have dug in this region and can tell you that, uh, political considerations end up overriding the actual evidence (ask the guys digging at the City of David, formerly the Arab neighbourhood of Silwan just outside the Jaffa Gate, where all the Assyrian, Byzantine and Abbasid levels went: they'll say "what levels?". They went in a bin unrecorded, which is appalling bad practice). There are a few good Israeli archaeologists but they're not the ones who get funding for large digs, as funding generally comes either from government or large corporations: any hypothetical Temple Mount excavations would end up run by Elad, whose other line of business is settlement construction. A few rogue archaeologists attempted to do this during the Mandate and before: they were British, American and German evangelicals and, surprise surprise, only found things that agreed with their worldview.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 13:07
|
|
|
Obliterati posted:Re: digging under al-Aqsa, it's not just about 'collapsing' it, which is fanciful. It's about archaeology and what might be under there. I have dug in this region and can tell you that, uh, political considerations end up overriding the actual evidence (ask the guys digging at the City of David, formerly the Arab neighbourhood of Silwan just outside the Jaffa Gate, where all the Assyrian, Byzantine and Abbasid levels went: they'll say "what levels?". They went in a bin unrecorded, which is appalling bad practice). There are a few good Israeli archaeologists but they're not the ones who get funding for large digs, as funding generally comes either from government or large corporations: any hypothetical Temple Mount excavations would end up run by Elad, whose other line of business is settlement construction. Yeah, I've heard that before but while I'm more than open to the idea that Zionist archaeologists are loving things up, ignoring and re-interpreting history, etc I'm too ignorant about archaeology to hold a firm view on exactly what is happening or to care too much about it when for me the main area of concern is the humanitarian rather than academic cost. Although the creation of a Jewish/Zionist history with the latter plays into the former, this is to a small extent. The reason I think it's worth talking about is because, whether out of genuine concern about the matter or as a ploy because they knew it was most important to Arafat and would sour negotiations or a mixture of the two, ownership and access to Al-Aqsa was perhaps the most significant area of contention in the 2000 Camp David summit - which sadly is probably the closest the peace process came to working (which is to say "not very well at all"). Even if you view it only as a matter of political grandstanding (I'm not saying you do, but even then), it is going to be something where concessions will be expected and realistically will probably have to be made in a peace process. It's also something I'd view as preferable, as allowing access for people to visit a site they think holds large religious significance for them should be standard in a free and civilised society which is what we want to develop for both Israel and Palestine. If there is ever going to be a stable situation in the region then we don't just need a free Palestine but also normalised relations between the two countries seeing as they need to co-exist. That means none of Israel's ridiculous peace process proposals where security concerns see it maintaining bases and outposts and areas of control throughout Palestine on an ongoing basis, but also an allowance that people should be allowed to visit a place they hold to be very religiously significant.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 13:32
|
|
|
team overhead smash posted:Yeah, I've heard that before but while I'm more than open to the idea that Zionist archaeologists are loving things up, ignoring and re-interpreting history, etc I'm too ignorant about archaeology to hold a firm view on exactly what is happening or to care too much about it when for me the main area of concern is the humanitarian rather than academic cost. Although the creation of a Jewish/Zionist history with the latter plays into the former, this is to a small extent. What you're saying is pretty reasonable but I do want to come back to the archaeology of this. The site I mentioned before, Silwan, used to be an Arab neighbourhood. Their houses were mostly demolished purely on the statement that they stood over the former Davidian city (which they haven't found). The rest were forcibly evicted. Jewish settlers have since been permitted to move in to the remaining buildings. Not coincidentally, the destruction of Silwan is part of Israel's policy of making it impossible to split the city in a two-state solution. It absolutely is a humanitarian concern: academically, none of these views are taken seriously outside of Israel and a few Biblical colleges in the US, so we're not really worried on that score. Here's Haaretz on the subject two years ago: quote:The most powerful political argument against Elad and Reich [the head archaeologist at the time] is that, thanks to their activities, they have precluded the possibility of ever reaching an accord with the Palestinians, since without a division of Jerusalem no such agreement can be attained. However, the Judaization of Silwan and the “occupation” of the City of David by settlers has apparently rendered future division of the city impossible. It's a political act that's just wearing academic clothing, and it's the same reason I am sworn to secrecy on the location of a sixth-century Orthodox church in the West Bank (it's just up the road from a settlement with form in destroying these sites in the belief that they weaken their land claims). Some kind of access deal on the Mount isn't unreasonable (hell, I've been up there and I'm not Muslim or Palestinian), but my point is that without a pre-existing peace deal on the rest of the business there's literally no way you can broach this without the Palestinian population, quite reasonably given previous form, seeing a land grab in progress. Don't forget the Second Intifada was partially sparked by Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount in 2000. As the most contentious piece of land in the entire region, it's not wise to try and make a deal on it first.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 14:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 10:34 |
|
|
Al Jazeera just posted an interactive map of Palestine. http://interactive.aljazeera.com/aje/PalestineRemix/maps_main.html
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 14:19
|
|