|
Liberal_L33t posted:Yeah, just like in the United States. When the civil rights movement suffered early setbacks, black leaders should have encouraged their followers to commit to an extremist ideology, call for the destruction of the country oppressing them, and commit terrorist acts of violence against the majority population! That would have REALLY loving helped bring about justice for the African American population sooner, and it definitely wouldn't have resulted in a lot of retaliatory violence! They dealt with MLK because they knew if they didn't they would be dealing with Malcom X. What you are describing is literally what happened.
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 22:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 04:30 |
|
|
Liberal_L33t posted:Yeah, just like in the United States. When the civil rights movement suffered early setbacks, black leaders should have encouraged their followers to commit to an extremist ideology, call for the destruction of the country oppressing them, and commit terrorist acts of violence against the majority population! That would have REALLY loving helped bring about justice for the African American population sooner, and it definitely wouldn't have resulted in a lot of retaliatory violence! You don't know the first thing about the civil rights movement.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 22:06
|
|
|
Yeah let's go ahead and compare a colonial conquest with an intra-state struggle for rights, as a total moron I see no discrepancy that would sink the comparison.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 22:08
|
|
|
Heavy neutrino posted:Yeah let's go ahead and compare a colonial conquest with an intra-state struggle for rights, as a total moron I see no discrepancy that would sink the comparison. Considering how black communities had to form militia's and groups to defend themselves against collective punishment I don't really see that huge of a difference.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 22:10
|
|
|
Academy nominated motion picture "Selma" taught me how MLK used his non-violence to force LBJ to sign the justice law making blacks and whites forever equal.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:So why are Americans, Russians, French, Ethiopians, and now even Indians entitled to being Israeli? Why is it that they are entitled to free immigration, but Palestinians are not? They're not. Only Jews with an entitlement to Israel are the ones born there, and the ones who live there now. DarkCrawler fucked around with this message at 22:27 on Mar 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 22:18
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:They're not. Only Jews with an entitlement to Israel are the ones born there, and the ones who live there now. Are you going to start interfering with Israel's immigration policy? I think having the choice of how much of a discriminatory rear end in a top hat you can be about who you let become a citizen of your country is one of the foundational privileges that a state has.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 22:32
|
|
|
So any future Palestinian state should have a full right of return for any Palestinian refugees abroad, right? Although I suppose one of the more contentious points would be Palestinians wanting to return to land within what are now Israel's de jure border, but I'm pretty sure general resistance to Palestinians being in control of their own borders and immigration goes hand-in-hand with Israeli demands that a future Palestinian state be demilitarized.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 23:49
|
|
|
Dolash posted:So any future Palestinian state should have a full right of return for any Palestinian refugees abroad, right? Although I suppose one of the more contentious points would be Palestinians wanting to return to land within what are now Israel's de jure border, but I'm pretty sure general resistance to Palestinians being in control of their own borders and immigration goes hand-in-hand with Israeli demands that a future Palestinian state be demilitarized. I'm not sure what you're saying. I don't think that those Israelis who have expressed support for the establishment of a State of Palestine have ever expressed concerns about Palestinians being allowed to immigrate there, but instead into the State of Israel within whatever borders it ends up with. The Right of Return, at least as expressed by most of those who demand it, seems to talk about the victims of the Nakba and the right of them and their descendents to return to their ancestral lands, many of which are inside the Green Line, so would be inside the State of Israel even if the 1967 borders were agreed to.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 23:58
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Are you going to start interfering with Israel's immigration policy? I think having the choice of how much of a discriminatory rear end in a top hat you can be about who you let become a citizen of your country is one of the foundational privileges that a state has. Depends who you ask, I suppose. Not really talking about the legal perspective though. Dolash posted:So any future Palestinian state should have a full right of return for any Palestinian refugees abroad, right? Although I suppose one of the more contentious points would be Palestinians wanting to return to land within what are now Israel's de jure border, but I'm pretty sure general resistance to Palestinians being in control of their own borders and immigration goes hand-in-hand with Israeli demands that a future Palestinian state be demilitarized. I would imagine so, though not sure how feasible it would be in the end, as it would double the population overnight and they wouldn't bring a lot of assets themselves. I don't think if we actually get to that point that Israel would care, it's not like being outnumbered by Arabs on their borders is anything new to them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 00:01
|
|
|
Miltank posted:Academy nominated motion picture "Selma" taught me how MLK used his non-violence to force LBJ to sign the justice law making blacks and whites forever equal. There's a scene in Selma where Malcolm X talks about how his followers are important too and then he never appears in the movie again so I guess they weren't important after all. Also in real life there's evidence LBJ collaborated with MLK on planning things but that also doesn't fit the narrative either does it gently caress Selma
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 00:05
|
|
|
About all the non-violence and Civil Rights, didn't the Federal Government have to deploy soldiers just to keep the Southerners from lynching schoolchildren and stuff like that? Multiple times?
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 00:38
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:About all the non-violence and Civil Rights, didn't the Federal Government have to deploy soldiers just to keep the Southerners from lynching schoolchildren and stuff like that? Multiple times? Yeah, I keep wondering who is going to send their 101st Airborne to integrate Greater Palestine.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 00:43
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:
This is not right. Jus soli and jus sanguinis are how citizenship is passed down in most cases(all cases?). If the Palestinians ascribe to the concept of jus sanguinis, then it legitimizes their claims as the rightful inhabitants of that land. American or British ideals of citizenship are not universal or even widespread. Germany only began offering citizenship to peoples born there in 1991, and even then they prohibited dual citizenship. You can be a Palestinian who was born in Jordan, just like you can be a German who was born in Mexico.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 00:53
|
|
|
CSM posted:No, we were talking about a two-state solution. You're just throwing up arbitrary and unacceptable concessions for the Palestinians they have to make before even any negotiations have started, so you can blame them for not wanting a two state solution. Arbitrary? I'm going by the standard of the international community. I loving know Hamas's positions. They support a temporary, 10-year ceasefire and flooding Israel with refugees. I said that from the loving start before you fired up Google because I already knew what their position was.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 01:17
|
|
|
Panas posted:This is not right. Jus soli and jus sanguinis are how citizenship is passed down in most cases(all cases?). If the Palestinians ascribe to the concept of jus sanguinis, then it legitimizes their claims as the rightful inhabitants of that land. American or British ideals of citizenship are not universal or even widespread. Germany only began offering citizenship to peoples born there in 1991, and even then they prohibited dual citizenship. You can be a Palestinian who was born in Jordan, just like you can be a German who was born in Mexico. If we're talking about the State of Palestine, sure. 1967 lines are however not recognized as state of Palestine by anyone nor claimed by the State of Palestinian as land of that territory. The Palestinian diaspora - at least six million people - are descended from all those people who lived in what is recognized as Israel by most countries. The 50,000 OG refugees weren't born in Israel, though, but Mandatory Palestine. So here is the issue - obviously in a two state situation you could give a citizenship to 50,000 Arabs and hide them away into some Negev shithole, Israelis will probably bite similar bullets if they are forced to come to the table when a two state solution is still feasible. But the six million children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren cannot possibly become part of the Jewish state that Israelis wouldn't give up on. This leaves only the State of Palestine - a disconnected poverty-ridden third world level patch of land in two pieces, one piece which is a bombed out ghetto that makes a Negev shithole look like a paradise. Absorbing 10 million people (let's face it, it's going to take like three decades at best) will be a challenge even if Palestine won't by then have 9 million of its own. http://populationpyramid.net/state-of-palestine/2050/ In a place scarcely larger then Connecticut, only about ten times more poor? Similarily a hypothetical single state will just be able to about to maintain demographic semi-parity with strict immigration quotas for both sides. It’s not going to work with Arabs having double of the population. In both cases, the logical option is to give the Palestinian refugees citizenship in the countries they have always been in and absorb them into the general population like Jordan, which due to all the wars all its neighbors constantly have is pretty much an Arabic Singapore by now. Ultimately everyone will benefit. Jordan is doing pretty well compared to the other countries in the region. Of course Lebanon (where most of the refugees without citizenship reside, I think) is the evil Arabic Singapore twin so I’m not holding my breath any time soon.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 01:25
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:They're not. Only Jews with an entitlement to Israel are the ones born there, and the ones who live there now. All Jews are entitled to Israel. That is why Israel exists, to be the Jewish homeland so that never again means never, ever again.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 01:27
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:All Jews are entitled to Israel. That is why Israel exists, to be the Jewish homeland so that never again means never, ever again. Yes, that makes sense for Jewish supremacists, its not any more relevant to the rest of us then the cries of White South Africans in 1990  If Israel truly wanted to secure a Jewish state it would cut the settlements loose and close the gates to all of West Bank, but sadly they value colonialism more.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 01:30
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:They're not. Only Jews with an entitlement to Israel are the ones born there, and the ones who live there now. Why the ones who live there now, and not the ones who might live there tomorrow? Does that mean somebody whose family has lived in Russian territory for a dozen generations until they immigrated to Israel yesterday has an entitlement to live in Israel, but somebody whose family has lived in Russian territory for a dozen generations until they try to immigrate to Israel tomorrow has no claim at all there? That makes no sense.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 01:37
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Why the ones who live there now, and not the ones who might live there tomorrow? Does that mean somebody whose family has lived in Russian territory for a dozen generations until they immigrated to Israel yesterday has an entitlement to live in Israel, but somebody whose family has lived in Russian territory for a dozen generations until they try to immigrate to Israel tomorrow has no claim at all there? That makes no sense. Because you need to cut it off somewhere, and population transfers aren't going to work out?
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 01:42
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Because you need to cut it off somewhere, and population transfers aren't going to work out? They seem to have worked out just fine in '48! And in the decades since!
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 01:43
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:They seem to have worked out just fine in '48! And in the decades since! With a lot of violence and expropriations. For most of which those upon which you with the same were not responsible.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 01:50
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:Arbitrary? I'm going by the standard of the international community. I loving know Hamas's positions. They support a temporary, 10-year ceasefire and flooding Israel with refugees. I said that from the loving start before you fired up Google because I already knew what their position was. loving refugees of Israeli ethnic cleansing wanting to return to their ancestral homes!!!!!! 
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 01:59
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:loving refugees of Israeli ethnic cleansing wanting to return to their ancestral homes!!!!!! loving refugees of arab ethnic cleansing making a new home!!!!
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 02:11
|
|
|
Heavy neutrino posted:Yeah let's go ahead and compare a colonial conquest with an intra-state struggle for rights, as a total moron I see no discrepancy that would sink the comparison. I'd say that the greater insult is comparing Malcom X and his followers, whatever their faults, to suicide-bombing death-fetishists like HAMAS. I would ask if this thread thinks that Indian independence would never have happened without notorious Hitler-admirer Subhas Chandra Bose, either. But then I realize at least a plurality of D&D probably does think that  Just so we're absolutely clear, here: those of you who arguing that Palestinians have good reasons to reject non-violence: Are you in favor of suicide bombing of civilian targets? Are you in favor of indiscriminate rocket and mortar fire into civilian neighborhoods? Don't change the subject to what Israelis have done. Are you in favor of these tactics, yes or no?
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 02:16
|
|
|
Liberal_L33t posted:I would ask if this thread thinks that Indian independence would never have happened without notorious Hitler-admirer Subhas Chandra Bose, either. But then I realize at least a plurality of D&D probably does think that So do you think Lehi had a net positive impact on the world? Liberal_L33t posted:Just so we're absolutely clear, here: those of you who arguing that Palestinians have good reasons to reject non-violence: Are you in favor of suicide bombing of civilian targets? Are you in favor of indiscriminate rocket and mortar fire into civilian neighborhoods? Don't change the subject to what Israelis have done. Are you in favor of these tactics, yes or no? If the subject is murder of civilians and terrorism, then it's not changing the subject if Israel regularly does these things, is it? I'm opposed to these things, unfortunately the party with the power to stop them from happening, Israel, isn't interested in doing that icantfindaname fucked around with this message at 02:52 on Mar 31, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 02:28
|
|
|
Liberal_L33t posted:I'd say that the greater insult is comparing Malcom X and his followers, whatever their faults, to suicide-bombing death-fetishists like HAMAS. If it stops the occupation and Siege of Gaza I don't give a poo poo if Hamas has a full artillery battalion of Katyusha rocket launchers working around the clock. How dare the Palestinian people retaliate, they should just sit down and calmly accept death at Israel's artillery and jets.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 02:32
|
|
|
Liberal_L33t posted:I'd say that the greater insult is comparing Malcom X and his followers, whatever their faults, to suicide-bombing death-fetishists like HAMAS. I feel a lot less confident about harshly judging an oppressed people's desperate attempts to strike back than I do about harshly judging their oppressors, who are being substantially supported by my government. In the same situation as many Palestinians, I can't say I wouldn't also want to make somebody hurt. But no, I also think they'd be on firmer ground, morally speaking, if they made conspicuous efforts to avoid civilian casualties.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 02:39
|
|
|
I wonder what Malcom X thought about Palestine? http://www.malcolm-x.org/docs/gen_zion.htm quote:Taken from The Egyptian Gazette -- Sept. 17, 1964
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 02:51
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:loving refugees of roman ethnic cleansing making a new home!!!!
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 03:26
|
|
|
I think the solution is to have Britain conquer an African micro-nation and unilaterally declare that to be the Palestinian homeland despite all evidence to the contrary and even though none of them have ever been there and then they should kill a bunch of Africans for no reason, and then move all the Palestinians there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 03:31
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:I wonder what Malcom X thought about Palestine? Are people surprised that the Nation of Islam is antisemitic and rife with the appropriately adapted conspiracy theories? I thought this was well-known.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 03:32
|
|
|
corn in the bible posted:I think the solution is to have Britain conquer an African micro-nation and unilaterally declare that to be the Palestinian homeland despite all evidence to the contrary and even though none of them have ever been there and then they should kill a bunch of Africans for no reason, and then move all the Palestinians there. That would be really dumb. Good thing it has nothing to do with the I/P conflict. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 03:34
|
|
|
Liberal_L33t posted:I'd say that the greater insult is comparing Malcom X and his followers, whatever their faults, to suicide-bombing death-fetishists like HAMAS. Yeah, it's just stupid to compare fine, upstanding folks like Hamas to a guy who thought white people were the literal devil, hoped for their extermination and cheered their deaths, and referred to MLK as a "chump". Absurd Alhazred posted:Are people surprised that the Nation of Islam is antisemitic and rife with the appropriately adapted conspiracy theories? I thought this was well-known. How about Nelson Mandela? "We identify with the PLO, because just like ourselves they are fighting for the right of self determination".
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 03:45
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Are people surprised that the Nation of Islam is antisemitic and rife with the appropriately adapted conspiracy theories? I thought this was well-known. I'm just saying using Malcom X of all people to concern troll about Hamas is hilarious, considering the guy Main Paineframe posted:thought white people were the literal devil, hoped for their extermination and cheered their deaths, and referred to MLK as a "chump".
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 03:48
|
|
|
Let's see what the famous man of peace and reconciliation, a Nobel Peace Prize winner who ended apartheid in his own country, Nelson Mandela, thought of the I/P thing? http://web.archive.org/web/20051215224658/http://www.jsonline.com/news/intl/ap/oct99/ap-palestinians-ma102099.asp quote:Mandela Speaks to Palestinians
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 04:03
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:loving refugees of Israeli ethnic cleansing wanting to return to their ancestral homes!!!!!! Under this same logic, Mizrahim are justified in their fervent desire for revenge against Arabs. You can either go with two standards. We right every historic wrong, or we go with what's workable today. The first is insane because of facts like Arabs ethnically cleansing Jews from Hebron, never mind the entire Middle East post-1948. How do we treat Arab immigrants from the pre-1948 era? Do we go back to the crusades and even to when Joshua slaughtered the Jebusites, righting injustices? No, because it's loving stupid, and to be fair you'd have to do an infinite regress that would never end. That is why the UN demands that Israel cede land like Hebron, Gilo, Har Homa, E1, etc... that they might legitimately have some legal claim to. That's why any realistic peace deal is not straight up 1967 borders, but rather involve some land swaps. E.g. http://www.pij.org/details.php?id=32 quote:Though the negotiations about land to remain part of Israel involved several areas, the process concerning Ma’ale Adumim illustrates some of the difficulties in pinning down where the parties were when the negotiation ended. Ma’ale Adumim is a large Israeli settlement (25,000 people) east of Jerusalem, blocking much north-south traffic for the new state of Palestine. The Palestinians were extremely fearful that the future Palestinian state would be divided by Israeli lands and roads, leaving it without a coherent land mass. Ma’ale Adumim raised this specter. At one point, the Palestinians agreed that Ma’ale Adumim would be annexed to Israel as part of the overall percentage. Israel argued for more area around the settlement, and connection to other settlements, and the Palestinians then rescinded their agreement. “Unofficially,” however, the Palestinians acknowledged that Ma’ale Adumim could be part of the annexation if the parties could work out the scope of the surrounding area. Thus, when the negotiation ended, the official Palestinian position refused Israeli annexation of Ma’ale Adumim, but, unofficially, negotiators on both sides saw the trade that would have reversed that position (access roads for the Palestinians and limited growth space for Ma’ale Adumim). quote:The hottest question concerning refugees was whether the Palestinians would be entitled to a right of return to the homes they came from in Israel. Though there is much debate on whether the parties did come to agreement on this, the evidence is pretty clear. The interviews, the uncontested account of the meeting that preceded the Saturday press conference, and the written record, or its absence, all point to agreement. There was a widespread unwillingness at Taba to commit agreements or even positions to writing, but this was not the case for the negotiators about refugees. They engaged in marathon drafting sessions, conducted sometimes by one side, sometimes jointly. But since Taba these documents have been assiduously kept hidden. Though there have been references to them, including a draft of one Israeli document in Le Monde6, as recently as July, 2002, Taba negotiators were making reference to Palestinian documents which would not be made public7. As with the maps, the only reasonable inference from this secrecy is that concessions were made for which the parties would now prefer not to accept responsibility. The only issue that could generate this much heat would be a Palestinian concession on the right of return. By one account, the Palestinians agreed to waive this right in return for an Israeli statement accepting at least partial responsibility for the departure of the Palestinians in 1948.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 04:31
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:How about Nelson Mandela? "We identify with the PLO, because just like ourselves they are fighting for the right of self determination". I'm just saying quoting rabid antisemitism favorably is kind of a bad idea in an I/P thread.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 04:33
|
|
|
It was also written in 1964.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 04:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 04:30 |
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:It was also written in 1964. It took the Six Day War for many people (especially in the Arab world) to really accept the armistice lines as a fait accompli.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 04:41
|
|