|
CSM posted:"I accept a Palestinian state according [to] the 1967 borders, with Jerusalem as the capital, with the right to return," the Hamas leader told Christine Amanpour in Cairo." Right of return = millions of refugees. That is not realistic for a deal. Israel is going to have to cave on settlements and Fatah/Hamas are going to have to cave on refugees. He was agreeing to something that Israel would never accept. It's about as empty as Bennett's plan for the West Bank. Kim Jong Il fucked around with this message at 01:45 on Mar 30, 2015 |
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 01:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 04:03 |
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:This is, by the way, why it's so very important to pay very close attention to wording in the I/P debate. When someone says that they want a demilitarized Palestinian state (which is what Netanyahu's "two-state solution" has always been), what they really mean is that they want a helpless Palestinian puppet state-in-name-only which is entirely at the mercy of Israel and under their complete and total military control. It's the greatest dream of center-right pro-Israel types, since the only actual effective change to the status quo would be that Israel would be able to delegitimize the Palestinian claims by saying "hey, we already gave you a state, what more could you want". South Africa tried it, and nobody bought it then either
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 01:48
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:South Africa tried it, and nobody bought it then either Bantustans, to my knowledge, never used mass suicide bombings for decades to push their agenda. Apartheid ended in South Africa because the cold war ended and the threat from communism receded. Maybe when the war on terror is won and islamist militancy ends, then we can re-examine our trade policies towards Israel.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 01:50
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Bantustans, to my knowledge, never used mass suicide bombings for decades to push their agenda. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umkhonto_we_Sizwe#Military_campaign
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 01:52
|
|
|
How many suicide attacks occured during the intifadas?
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 01:55
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:Right of return = millions of refugees. That is not realistic for a deal. Israel is going to have to cave on settlements and Fatah/Hamas are going to have to cave on refugees. He was agreeing to something that Israel would never accept. It's about as empty as Bennett's plan for the West Bank. I wish we could let those people back into the country we kicked them out of but it's just not realistic 
Badger of Basra fucked around with this message at 03:34 on Mar 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 03:08
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:I wish we let those people back into the country Sounds reasonable to me!
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 03:32
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Sounds reasonable to me! It was reasonable enough for the Jews! Time to repeal the Law of Return I guess. Badger of Basra fucked around with this message at 03:35 on Mar 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 03:33
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:It was reasonable enough for the Jews! Well, I'm sure if the Palestinians wait 2000 years, until whatever empire is ruling over the area weakens, then take advantage of these weaknesses, migrate and then organize militarily while maneuvering diplomatically to gain international legitimacy, and then find themselves in dire need of refuge, they will be able to pull this off. It's highly uncommon, though. Just ask the "repatriated" Germans and the vast majority of refugee populations who never got to go back anywhere (including all those Jews who tried to go back to Poland and got massacred for the trouble after WWII). quote:Time to repeal the Law of Return I guess. Probably beyond time, yeah.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 03:37
|
|
|
Juffo-Wup posted:The axis nations did the 'honorable' thing and surrendered unconditionally only after the allies burned an astounding number of cities to the ground. There's an argument to be made that a negotiated surrender would have resulted in far fewer civilian casualties, and therefore that Potsdam was a moral catastrophe. I realize this is a day late but I'm still surprised no one pointed this out: Germany surrendered unconditionally only after Hitler realized he was literally within hours of being captured by the Red Army and shot himself in the head. Even then the remnants of the German government that were left (the Doenitz regime in Flensburg) tried to "negotiate", and were completely ignored for a few weeks until the Allies got around to putting them under arrest. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flensburg_Government Japan's example is less clear because it wasn't as completely defeated, but arguably they surrendered unconditionally only when it was clear that the US was ready and willing to methodically destroy every city in Japan with nuclear weapons. These are not good examples of the "honorable" thing! And the only analog that's possible in this context is Israel annexing the West Bank and Gaza and essentially imposing a second Nakba of ethnic cleansing. This is also not a good example to strive for, which is why "unconditional surrender" is a really bad idea to suggest (much like taking seriously Hamas' long term position that every Jew in Israel should leave or live under Islamic rule, depending on who is talking) Lum_ fucked around with this message at 04:26 on Mar 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 04:23
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Sounds reasonable to me! "Ancestor" has a certain sense of historical remove, like those guys aren't walking around or something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 04:39
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:"Ancestor" has a certain sense of historical remove, like those guys aren't walking around or something. There aren't millions of them walking around, though. There are millions of refugees and their descendents around, but they somehow get defined as refugees as well. Now let me ask you: should people of my generation, hell, of my parents` and the grandparents of some people living in Israel today, be liable for crimes committed by their parents and grandparents to the parents and grandparents and great-grand-parents of those demanding the Right of Return, before any of these people were born? Reparations on a state level are one thing, but Right of Return means all these people now have to become the neighbors of my kin. Is that something that is going to end peacefully? Now?
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 04:52
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:There aren't millions of them walking around, though. There are millions of refugees and their descendents around, but they somehow get defined as refugees as well. Now let me ask you: should people of my generation, hell, of my parents` and the grandparents of some people living in Israel today, be liable for crimes committed by their parents and grandparents to the parents and grandparents and great-grand-parents of those demanding the Right of Return, before any of these people were born? Reparations on a state level are one thing, but Right of Return means all these people now have to become the neighbors of my kin. Is that something that is going to end peacefully? Now? Unlimited right of return seems to work just fine for the Jewish residents of Israel, why wouldn't it work for the Palestinians? I can't think of any justification for claiming it won't work that isn't racist, discriminatory, or openly unfair. Absurd Alhazred posted:Reparations on a state level are one thing, but Right of Return means all these people now have to become the neighbors of my kin. Is that something that is going to end peacefully? Now? Given that Israelis are already migrating into Palestinian territory en masse it seems to work out somehow or other. I suppose it'd be a bit dishonest to really call that "peaceful", but for some reason nobody seems to have any problem with Israelis and Palestinians living together when armed soldiers are standing around and watching the violence to make sure that the Palestinians are the only ones getting hurt!
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 07:16
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:Right of return = millions of refugees. That is not realistic for a deal. Israel is going to have to cave on settlements and Fatah/Hamas are going to have to cave on refugees. He was agreeing to something that Israel would never accept. It's about as empty as Bennett's plan for the West Bank.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 07:31
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Unlimited right of return seems to work just fine for the Jewish residents of Israel, why wouldn't it work for the Palestinians? I can't think of any justification for claiming it won't work that isn't racist, discriminatory, or openly unfair. Israel is a nation of foreign refugees with nowhere else to turn. Palestinians have turned everywhere else, and alienated most of them what with all the antics they've gotten up to like with Jordan, and have yet to turn towards peaceful coexistance with Israel.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 08:04
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:I prefer to pay attention to what Meshaal says to his international partners rather than his empassioned speeches to the Palestinian throngs because I know he is a politician making campaign speeches. laffo at "let's believe what politicians say to an English-language interviewer, not to the people back home who keep them in power". You gonna be consistent and conclude that Bibi supports equal rights for Arab-Israelisand a two-state solution? No? Didn't think so. quote:They're not crazy people who absolutely want to kill Jews and use the IP conflict as a pretext. Oh, well, as long as they're just like "I could go for killing a bunch of Jews but I don't absolutely want to if you feel like staying in and watching Netflix" then hand over control of Jerusalem to them and tell Israeli Jews to start marching westward. Look, let me break it down for you. Hamas is a explicitly, foundationally anti-semitic organization. Please stop trying to tie yourself into knots deluding yourself otherwise It's...a little disturbing, actually. Not at the point where it becomes reminiscent of  but it's starting to get closer.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 09:24
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:laffo at "let's believe what politicians say to an English-language interviewer, not to the people back home who keep them in power". You gonna be consistent and conclude that Bibi supports equal rights for Arab-Israelisand a two-state solution? No? Didn't think so. I don't recall Bibi saying that he supports equal rights for Arab-Israelis. The Insect Court posted:Oh, well, as long as they're just like "I could go for killing a bunch of Jews but I don't absolutely want to if you feel like staying in and watching Netflix" then hand over control of Jerusalem to them and tell Israeli Jews to start marching westward. There's no doubt that they hate Israelis as Israelis are their occupiers. Reading 1919 history books about Germany from the point of view of the French, you'll find depictions of The German as a member of a barbaric and unwashed race, of Hunnic and Gothic descent, worthy of hate and contempt. Guess why? It's not because the French were irrational German-haters who would murder each and every German if they had the occasion. Of course they will use antisemitic rhetoric, but their antisemitism is caused first and foremost by the occupation and the fact that their enemy in this conflict are Jews. Much like I wouldn't say that the Israeli right-wing is by nature anti-Arab - their hatred of Arabs is caused by the conflict itself. Achieve a respectable peace, and watch as the Palestinian hatred of Israelis goes down.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 11:13
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Israel is a nation of foreign refugees with nowhere else to turn. Palestinians have turned everywhere else, and alienated most of them what with all the antics they've gotten up to like with Jordan, and have yet to turn towards peaceful coexistance with Israel. They could have carved out an empire in Europe but they were chumps and refused to fight the US or USSR and instead fought the D team.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 11:32
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Israel is a nation of foreign refugees with nowhere else to turn. What about New York City? The Insect Court posted:Look, let me break it down for you. Israel is a explicitly, foundationally racist organization. Please stop trying to tie yourself into knots deluding yourself otherwise It's...a little disturbing, actually. Not at the point where it becomes reminiscent of I agree it's a problem.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 11:43
|
|
|
So you guys are perfectly cool with Israelis turning away african refugees right? I mean, there are other places for them to go. Oh, what is that? It's only jewish refugees of one of the largest genocides of the 20th century who ought to 'go back to poland, or germany, or wherever it is they came from'. New York City you say, the peak of hilarity. In the meanwhile of course you all support the decision by arab countries to treat Palestinians as political currency and deny them asylum rights and citizenship in their countries of refuge cause that would make things 'too easy' for the 'zionist colonialist enterprise'. Seems like there are two classes of refugees distinct of all other refugees as far as humane leftest posters are concerned, those who ought to gently caress off back to where they came from and those who ought to never live a normal life until they're given back the lands taken from them, it's all very progressive.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 12:02
|
|
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:So you guys are perfectly cool with Israelis turning away african refugees right? emanresu tnuocca posted:I mean, there are other places for them to go. Oh, what is that? It's only jewish refugees of one of the largest genocides of the 20th century who ought to 'go back to poland, or germany, or wherever it is they came from'. New York City you say, the peak of hilarity. emanresu tnuocca posted:In the meanwhile of course you all support the decision by arab countries to treat Palestinians as political currency and deny them asylum rights and citizenship in their countries of refuge cause that would make things 'too easy' for the 'zionist colonialist enterprise'. emanresu tnuocca posted:Seems like there are two distinct classes of refugees as far as humane leftest posters are concerned, those who ought to gently caress off back to where they came from and those who ought to never live a normal life until they're given back the lands taken from them, it's all very progressive.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 12:08
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:The idea that Jews had nowhere else to turn than to a hostile land they had to conquer by force is the peak of hilarity IMO. Aquiring Palestine probably set the whole Zionist project back many years. I think it's pretty safe to say that the other options would be more expedient, but that's on the WZO. However, North America and Europe would never take the Jews.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 12:14
|
|
|
I actually firmly support maximum assistance for Palestinian refugees but the pretty sure fact that if Palestinians left they en masse 'd never be allowed back is actually a pretty problematic moral dilemma and I'm not sure why it's being put to the thread here in begging terms as if it isn't.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 12:16
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Groups with similar causes and ideologies often feel some solidarity with each other. The IRA in particular are strongly anti-colonialism, and have opposed colonial projects in Palestine for nearly a century. Please tell me more about the brave and noble anti-colonialist stance of the Japanese Red Army, the Revolutionary Cells and the Red Brigades.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 12:32
|
|
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:In the meanwhile of course you all support the decision by arab countries to treat Palestinians as political currency and deny them asylum rights and citizenship in their countries of refuge cause that would make things 'too easy' for the 'zionist colonialist enterprise'. Seems like there are two classes of refugees distinct of all other refugees as far as humane leftest posters are concerned, those who ought to gently caress off back to where they came from and those who ought to never live a normal life until they're given back the lands taken from them, it's all very progressive. IMO, I don't think there's any problem with the law of return allowing Jews from anywhere in the world to come to Israel, because Israel exists, now, and that's an inescapable fact. Israel's foundation may have been a colonialist enterprise, and as such illegitimate at the time (even though I have no problem with Jews fleeing to Mandatory Palestine during the 30's and 40's, obviously), but Israel exists today, and there are millions of Israelis. I really don't care for hypotheticals about "yeah well they could have set up their country in NYC or Uganda", that's a meaningless hypothetical. And most countries' definition of what constitutes "their people" is similarly based on a mythical foundation, so I don't have a problem with Israel allowing Jews from all over the world to immigrate to Israel. What's problematic, really, is that they refuse to do the same with the other inhabitants of the area, namely the Palestinian exiles. In that sense, the Law of Return is discriminatory and racist, and it should extend to Palestinians who can trace back their ancestry to the area. It's a poo poo thing that neighboring countries wouldn't offer citizenship to the refugees - but that doesn't make it the only valid or even practical solution to the humanitarian problem caused by the existence of these refugees.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 13:12
|
|
|
CSM posted:Good job on trying to change subjects. Next time spend some time Googling instead of regurgitating zionist talking points. Changing subjects? I asked for you to provide one single quote showing that Hamas supported the quartet plan and they did not. They offered a hudna and they insist on a poison pill that Israel would never accept. emanresu tnuocca posted:In the meanwhile of course you all support the decision by arab countries to treat Palestinians as political currency and deny them asylum rights and citizenship in their countries of refuge cause that would make things 'too easy' for the 'zionist colonialist enterprise'. Did you see the report about the Abbas aide begging the Arab league to attack Gaza like they did Yemen? Kim Jong Il fucked around with this message at 13:37 on Mar 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 13:35
|
|
|
I have clarified my own position in regards to the 'right of return' in the past, I do not deny the rights of refugees and their descendants to return to either Israel or the Palestine that will come to be, I have a problem with the unreasonable demand to return every single refugee as a precondition for normalcy, I think it's a rather tall order to go from 'mutually murdering each other' to 'living together in harmony' without first having a period where we don't mutually murder one another, and the simple fact is that regardless of the fact that Israel is doing a lot to prevent normalcy it is not the only side of the conflict that is actively working against it, preventing basic human rights from palestinian refugees in the surrounding countries is a policy designed specifically to ensure that the tensions between the peoples are never reduced to the point where the rights of refugees (on both sides ideally but I think Mizrahi jews generally are not interested in moving back to the countries of their ancestors) are negotiated and resolved diplomatically and peacefully. That's why Abbas' position in regards to the right of return which is "I cannot deny refugees their inherent rights and forfeit the right of return" vs. Hamas' position of "Right of return as a requisite for a two state settlement" is fundamentally different, one leads to peace and normalcy, the other is as fake as the various 'peace offers' brought to the table by every Israeli administration since the Rabin one (and possibly that administration as well). In the meanwhile I find it abhorrent to deny the very humanitarian crisis of the refugees of the Nazi holocaust who've found their way to Palestine before 1948, I consider the Nakba a tragedy (a tragedy which could have easily been prevented by the mandatory administration) yet I do not consider it an inevitability of the jewish migration into Palestine nor do I consider the unique right of Palestinian pre-1948 to deny asylum to the victims of a genocide to be self evident as many here seem to consider. poo poo hit the fan, the Hagana and the Yishuv Leadership mobilized the refugees of the holocaust into undertaking terrible acts of ethnic cleansing, the way forward does not involve throwing more poo poo into the fan and if this makes me a servant of ZOG I don't really care, one way or another there will one day be peace in this land, the only question that remains is how many people needlessly die in the process.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 13:36
|
|
|
Yeah. The obvious solution is a total ban on rigth to Return. No jews and no palestinians. That`s the only way the world will accept a two state solution that does not include allowing refugees to Return to Israeli (pre-1967 borders) territory. Redrawing the borders is always possible if one is willing to spill enough blood. But the right of Return would be an unimitaged and unfixable disaster.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 13:39
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:There aren't millions of them walking around, though. There are millions of refugees and their descendents around, but they somehow get defined as refugees as well. Now let me ask you: should people of my generation, hell, of my parents` and the grandparents of some people living in Israel today, be liable for crimes committed by their parents and grandparents to the parents and grandparents and great-grand-parents of those demanding the Right of Return, before any of these people were born? Reparations on a state level are one thing, but Right of Return means all these people now have to become the neighbors of my kin. Is that something that is going to end peacefully? Now? No individual should be punished for this, but uh, I don't think you get to say that the descendants of refugees evicted in living memory have no right to live in Israel, when Jewish residence in Israel is mandated on reconquest from the Roman Empire. It also doesn't help that Israel is currently engaged in ethnic cleansing in the West Bank, with the explicit end goal of holding on to the settlements long enough for them to become someone's grandparents' homes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 13:58
|
|
|
Emanesru, do you know of any data about where the Palestinian victims of the Nakba came from ? How many of them are from (what are now) Israeli cities and territories, how many are from Cisjordan and Gaza? I'm guessing that the majority fled from Israeli territory, but is there any hard data on that? Is there any evidence that PLO leaders would consider a Right to Return for the refugees to Cisjordan, instead of their former homes? Back when Arafat, Rabin, and even Sharon were in charge, was this considered, maybe with reparations by the state of Israel to go along with this relocation? quote:In the meanwhile I find it abhorrent to deny the very humanitarian crisis of the refugees of the Nazi holocaust who've found their way to Palestine before 1948, I consider the Nakba a tragedy (a tragedy which could have easily been prevented by the mandatory administration) yet I do not consider it an inevitability of the jewish migration into Palestine nor do I consider the unique right of Palestinian pre-1948 to deny asylum to the victims of a genocide to be self evident as many here seem to consider.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 13:59
|
|
|
I'm not sure what's unique about anyone's right to deny victims of a genocide, that is an utterly absurd rhetorical flourish. Britain and the USA turned away holocaust refugees in droves.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 14:04
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Unlimited right of return seems to work just fine for the Jewish residents of Israel, why wouldn't it work for the Palestinians? I can't think of any justification for claiming it won't work that isn't racist, discriminatory, or openly unfair. Israel won its war with the Arabs and won the land. Whether that's unfair or not, it's the ordinary way land is divided up by human beings.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 14:14
|
|
|
Other cool things like that you could say: Rome won its war with the Sabines and won the women. Whether that's unfair or not, it's the ordinary way women are divided up by human beings.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 14:18
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:Other cool things like that you could say: We moved on from the "women are property" phase but we consider land to be property.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 14:31
|
|
hakimashou posted:We moved on from the "women are property" phase but we consider land to be property. Exactly. But the issue isn't the latter - rather, it's whether conquest is a good way of apportioning it. I think we can probably safely say at this point that it isn't. If you admit we can move on from previously held bad standards I'm not sure how helpful it is to say 'well we've always done this'. Israel got in to the white settler colonial model as Europeans were getting out.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 14:35
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:Israel won its war with the Arabs and won the land. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 14:43 on Mar 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 14:40
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:Israel won its war with the Arabs and won the land. This hasn't been the case for about 70 years or so, sorry gramps. Territorial annexation by force of arms is prohibited and very rarely recognized by international instances, which generally consider the annexed territory as "occupied", at least until the people there have expressed a will to be attached to the annexing power. The right of people to self-determination is something that exists, whether you like it or not. Consider as examples East Timor, or Kuweit in 1991, or even Crimea last year, to see how the international community views annexation. (Also there's the point that Israel never officially annexed the West Bank or Gaza itself, so no, they definitely did not "win" the land). Again, the world is not a video game and you have a child's notion of international relations.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 14:51
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:Changing subjects? I asked for you to provide one single quote showing that Hamas supported the quartet plan and they did not. They offered a hudna and they insist on a poison pill that Israel would never accept. All because you didn't take the time to actually Google Hamas's positions. CSM fucked around with this message at 15:12 on Mar 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 15:10
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:Exactly. But the issue isn't the latter - rather, it's whether conquest is a good way of apportioning it. I think we can probably safely say at this point that it isn't. If you admit we can move on from previously held bad standards I'm not sure how helpful it is to say 'well we've always done this'. Israel got in to the white settler colonial model as Europeans were getting out. I think that there are certain facts of history connected to israel and the jewish people which make it less than helpful to insist on viewing through the prism of "white settler colonialism." Israel's enemies tried more than once now to reconquer the lands by force and they failed. The continued existence of Israel is a settled issue. Israel's sovereign territory doesn't belong to the Arabs anymore. Like how Manhattan doesn't belong to American Indians.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 15:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 04:03 |
|
|
Baudolino posted:Yeah. The obvious solution is a total ban on rigth to Return. No jews and no palestinians. That`s the only way the world will accept a two state solution that does not include allowing refugees to Return to Israeli (pre-1967 borders) territory. Redrawing the borders is always possible if one is willing to spill enough blood. But the right of Return would be an unimitaged and unfixable disaster. If we're going by 1967, should we not also relocate people who settled there post 1967?
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 15:17
|
|
