|
Disinterested posted:I think it's partly for domestic reasons and partly because they don't want to give up the ghost on shoving them back in to Palestine. Hence my use of "settle" as a signifier of permanency
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 14:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 05:15 |
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:Hence my use of "settle" as a signifier of permanency Yeah, fair enough. I think they are effectively staying for good with things as they stand and have done OK in Jordan. Better than the 100,000 or so Palestinians in Syria, anyway.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 14:19
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:Yeah, fair enough. I think they are effectively staying for good with things as they stand and have done OK in Jordan. Better than the 100,000 or so Palestinians in Syria, anyway. Speaking of, they're even more hosed now: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-32147888
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 15:10
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:This is not to mention the fact that, when Jordan and Syria took refugees and the refugees crossed the border back in to the country, Israel then proceeded to blow up villages in Syria and Jordan in retaliation ... No, I literally laughed out loud here. The refugees merely "crossed the border back [into Israel]". What did they do once they were there? Who knows. Charity works, probably. Established a kitten petting zoo, I believe. We do know for a fact what the Israelis did in retaliation for all that puppy hugging. Textbook. Bravo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 18:48
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:What I mean is that that Israel saw Palestinians not as a distinct national identity, but as merely part of the larger Arab world, and why should they care if Arabs were moved into already Arab lands? Becauuuuuse they already lived on Arab lands, which they were being ethnically cleansed from? The Nakba was about Palestinians being driven from their homes and lands by violent terrorist militias bent on expelling non-Jews from the area; where the refugees fleeing massacre and slaughter ended up was hardly the primary issue, and whether they were seen as "Palestinian Arabs" or just "Arabs" had little impact on the nationalist terror being waged by people who were neither Palestinian nor Arab. In any case, if you want to talk about people who have been displaced and forced into refugee camps, there's no need to go back in time. There's plenty of refugee camps right there in Gaza, where more homeless and helpless victims of Israeli bombing campaigns end up after each Israeli offense.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
Xander77 posted:Ahaha. Jesus gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 22:09
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:Well, the Arab League was involved in the pre-declaration civil war through al-Qawuqji and the Arab Liberation Army. What I mean is that that Israel saw Palestinians not as a distinct national identity, but as merely part of the larger Arab world, and why should they care if Arabs were moved into already Arab lands? At the time, I think Israel would have seen it as being like complaining about Sudetenland nationalism. And while yes, Palestinian identity existed, other Arab national identities were subsumed in the post-colonial redrawing of borders (I don't hear much about Jordanians looking to split off the north to rejoin Damascus as a nation), and it certainly could have been the case that the Palestinian refugees of the Nakba could be resettled in the lands that they escaped to. I mean, again, Jordan annexed the West Bank: this wasn't for the Palestinians' benefit. Outwardly, Zionists have projected an image of the Palestinian Arabs as "just" Arabs who could well live anywhere (then and now), but internally, in the texts that I have read, they seemed very well aware of the fact that the Palestinian Arabs viewed Palestine as their distinct homeland.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 22:21
|
|
|
If the Israelis don't want the Arabs in "their" land why don't they just conqueror some more land and send them there? Oh because then they'd want that land as well. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 23:11
|
|
Xander77 posted:Ahaha. Jesus gently caress. gently caress off with your idiotic projection. I make no bones about what lots of those people were doing. But let's for a moment take a look what was occuring. One could refer to Benny Morris's Border Wars, a review of which by Avi Shlaim I cite: Avi Shlaim, Israel and Palestine posted:The conventional (Israeli) view is that the Palestinian infiltration into Israel was aided and abetted by the Arab governments following the defeat of their regular armies on the battlefield; that it was a form of undeclared guerilla warfare designed to weaken and even destroy the infant Jewish state; that Israel was thus the innocent victim of Arab provocation and Arab aggression; and that its military reprisals were legitimately undertaken in self-defence. The evidence gleaned by Morris from Israeli, British, American and UN archives - Arab governments, do not, as a rule, open their archives to research - suggests that infiltration into Israel was a direct consequence of the displacement and dispossession of over 700,000 Palestinians in the course of the Palestine War, and that the motives behind it were largely economic and social rather than political. Many of the infiltrators were Palestinian refugees whose reasons for crossing the border included looking for relatives, returning to their homes, recovering possessions, tending their fields, harvesting, and, occasionally, exacting revenge. Some of the infiltrators were theives and smugglers; others were nomadic Bedouins, more accustomed to grazing rights than state borders. There were acts of terror and politically motivated raids, such as those organised by the ex-Mufti, Haj Amin al-Husseini, and financed by Saudi Arabia, but they did not amount to very much. In the period 1949-56 as a whole, 90 per cent or more of all infiltrations, in Morris's estimate, were motivated by economic and social concerns. It goes on and on and on.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 00:45
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:gently caress off with your idiotic projection. I make no bones about what lots of those people were doing. Exactly! Nearly 90% of infiltrators were civilians motivated by economic and social concerns. What's that? The other ten percent? Oh, you know, probably people delivering teddy bear bouquets as a sign of friendship. Disinterested posted:Clearly a solid motivation for gunning them all down as a collective punishment as they try desperately to repair their torn-asunder lives. A perfectly good reason to massacre villages of women and children. Evidently this did a great deal to push the peace situation forward. Now now D.I., don't get cross. You tried to get one across the plate by pretending that Israeli strikes into Jordan in the early 50s were all about those bloodthirsty Israelis wanting to punish helpless refugees. Then you got called out on your bullshit misrepresentations. Now you're going to try to pretend that your argument was about disproportionate Israeli response to terrorist raids when you tried to start out pretending those raids never happened. Feel free to apologize for trying to mislead us and then make that argument anew if you like, but it's not the one you were making. The Insect Court fucked around with this message at 01:06 on Apr 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 00:58
|
|
The Insect Court posted:Exactly! Nearly 90% of infiltrators were civilians motivated by economic and social concerns. What's that? The other ten percent? Oh, you know, probably people delivering teddy bear bouquets as a sign of friendship. Clearly a solid motivation for gunning them all down as a collective punishment as they try desperately to repair their torn-asunder lives. A perfectly good reason to massacre villages of women and children. Evidently this did a great deal to push the peace situation forward, as the utopian situation of the present shows.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 01:00
|
|
|
I guess add collective punishment to ethnic cleansing and apartheid on the list of things Insect Court supports
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 01:02
|
|
|
If you can find a way to read that passage and think 'Hrm, Israel, very reasonable and measured in its response' you are an actual sociopath. I have never pretended once in my posting that Hamas is Cool and Good. Search away, friends. If you read that in to what I am saying you are reading something that is not there.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 01:04
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:I guess add collective punishment to ethnic cleansing and apartheid on the list of things Insect Court supports add?
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 01:06
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:Now now D.I., don't get cross. You tried to get one across the plate by pretending that Israeli strikes into Jordan in the early 50s were all about those bloodthirsty Israelis wanting to punish helpless refugees. Then you got called out on your bullshit misrepresentations. Now you're going to try to pretend that your argument was about disproportionate Israeli response to terrorist raids. Feel free to apologize for trying to mislead us and then make that argument anew if you like, but it's not the one you were making. If you're going to do this, just have the actual balls to say outright that you think it was right of Israel to use every measure, including murder and massacre, to make sure that as few refugees as possible would be able to return home. Not only does the academic research confirm it, but if they hadn't then Israel might not have been here today so you will have to make up your mind and choose your side, and to save everyone's time and energy, stop escaping the core issue through various moral escape tunnels.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 01:15
|
|
|
Svartvit posted:If you're going to do this, just have the actual balls to say outright that you think it was right of Israel to use every measure, including murder and massacre, to make sure that as few refugees as possible would be able to return home. Not only does the academic research confirm it, but if they hadn't then Israel might not have been here today so you will have to make up your mind and choose your side, and to save everyone's time and energy, stop escaping the core issue through various moral escape tunnels. It was a war, bad things occur during wartime. You cannot hold Israelis to a higher standard than Arabs without appearing like an anti-semite. Israeli ethnic violence occured during the breakout for independence, while Arab ethnic cleansings were attempted for the 30 odd years preceeding. Its no wonder that a community will create its own state with functioning institutions when under existential pressure. A community which fails to create those institutions and develop, while blaming an enigmatic 'other' for every problem, especially those of their own making, will never achieve developed nation status and be accepted by the international community as partners within the American framework for inter-state relations.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 01:23
|
|
|
Svartvit posted:If you're going to do this, just have the actual balls to say outright that you think it was right of Israel to use every measure, including murder and massacre, to make sure that as few refugees as possible would be able to return home. Not only does the academic research confirm it, but if they hadn't then Israel might not have been here today so you will have to make up your mind and choose your side, and to save everyone's time and energy, stop escaping the core issue through various moral escape tunnels. Well of course it wasn't Svartit. Please don't project the bad faith and dishonesty of anti-Zionists like Disinterested onto me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 01:44
|
|
|
http://www.barenakedislam.com/2013/05/19/did-you-know-that-muslim-countries-are-the-most-racist-and-intolerant-places-on-earth/ wellp now ya know. courtesy of some idiot in the ha'aretz facebook comments
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 01:51
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:You cannot hold Israelis to a higher standard than Arabs without appearing like an anti-semite. What's the special snowflake word for holding Arabs to a higher standard than Israelis, then?
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 04:04
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:gently caress off with your idiotic projection. I make no bones about what lots of those people were doing. quote:It goes on and on and on.  ... In other news, 5 infant deaths over the last month in an ad-hoc kindergarten for the children of illegal immigrants, and nobody is actually doing anything (and I can't find a single English source on the subject because who gives a poo poo, apparently) (Because the whole "no problem is more important than the one that is never going to be solved" is apparently just fine with everyone involved, which is just absolutely loving fantastic)
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 07:58
|
|
Xander77 posted:Don't you? What was it "lots of those people" were doing? Because your posts go right the gently caress out of their way to avoid indicating that, even in response to a specific request that you stop doing that. Apparently you have limited interest in the fact that the majority of the people were not violent and that they were made more violent by a policy of shooting them all unarmed. Just another example of how using security concerns to override everything else has bitten Israel in the rear end. I'm deeply concerned for Israel's long term security, which I don't think can be secured without altering the trend of its behaviour. Many of the actions it takes most vigorously for its own security work actively against that interest in my view.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 08:36
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:A community which fails to create those institutions and develop, while blaming an enigmatic 'other' for every problem, especially those of their own making, will never achieve developed nation status and be accepted by the international community as partners within the American framework for inter-state relations. When your favored country stops mooching off a real great power you can talk about developing and creating institutions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 11:33
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:It was a war, bad things occur during wartime. You cannot hold Israelis to a higher standard than Arabs without appearing like an anti-semite. Israeli ethnic violence occured during the breakout for independence, while Arab ethnic cleansings were attempted for the 30 odd years preceeding. Its no wonder that a community will create its own state with functioning institutions when under existential pressure. You're doing the same thing. Israel created a state because they wanted a state. They removed the Arabs and held them at the gate because they wanted a Jewish state. This is what the Zionists said and this is what you're really saying, but you abuse the language in some kind of pretend-politician way. Literally every sentence in your post is an excuse for something. Why can't you just say with a straight face what you think was right or wrong to do? I know it's a fact that Israelis do it, and the Zionists did it, but their smooth western fanboys cannot for the life of them do it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 12:30
|
|
|
Svartvit posted:You're doing the same thing. Israel created a state because they wanted a state. They removed the Arabs and held them at the gate because they wanted a Jewish state. This is what the Zionists said and this is what you're really saying, but you abuse the language in some kind of pretend-politician way. Literally every sentence in your post is an excuse for something. Why can't you just say with a straight face what you think was right or wrong to do? I know it's a fact that Israelis do it, and the Zionists did it, but their smooth western fanboys cannot for the life of them do it. Welcome to MIGF posting.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 14:13
|
|
|
I had a stupid idea that would never work, but I figured I'd air it out here anyway. It seems like a couple of the big bones of contention with a 2-state solution are that Jews don't want to lose access to any part of Jerusalem, which isn't that unreasonable, and they don't want to give up their settlements, which is less reasonable but not really something anyone can force them to do at this point. It seems like the big bone of contention with a 1-state solution is that it would make it impossible to have a Jewish homeland because you can't really define a state that way when a huge part of its population isn't Jewish. Additionally, Israelis (rightly or wrongly) fear that if the Arab population of Israel was suddenly the same size as the Jewish population, that acts of revenge or ethnic cleansing might be carried out against them. What if we split the difference? Could you have a federalized, 2-state 1-country? How about The United State of Israel and Palestine. Israel gets a state parliament and Jews continue to have the right of return to the state of Israel. Gaza and the West Bank become a state with its own state parliament. A federal parliament with 1/2 seats from Israel and 1/2 seats from Palestine sits in Jerusalem and handles all matters that affect both states, whilst the two states are free to rule themselves in purely internal matters via their state parliaments. The way I see it, this has a couple advantages versus the other solutions. First of all, it guarantees everyone involved access to Jerusalem, and also makes Jerusalem the capitol of the overall country (how many times has Bibi made noise about moving the capitol from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem?). Second of all, it guarantees both sides permanent homelands for their people and doesn't force anyone already there to relocate, as everyone is a citizen of the larger federal country and should be able to move freely across the state borders. Thirdly, it gives both sides equal representation in the government, so no one feels like one bad election could lead to harm for their people. Additionally, the military could then become a combined force of Israelis and Palestinians. All units could be required to be integrated so that there's no purely Israeli or Palestinian forces within the military. That way no one feels like one state's army is suddenly going to turn their guns on the other state. Obviously the biggest thing that makes this not work is the "nobody is actually negotiating in good faith in the I/P conflict", but I'm interested in hearing about less trite problems with this idea.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 20:46
|
|
|
LeftistMuslimObama posted:I had a stupid idea that would never work, but I figured I'd air it out here anyway. It seems like a couple of the big bones of contention with a 2-state solution are that Jews don't want to lose access to any part of Jerusalem, which isn't that unreasonable, and they don't want to give up their settlements, which is less reasonable but not really something anyone can force them to do at this point. Would they have a unified judicial system, or would it be a gigantic clusterfuck of extraterritoriality?
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
b0lt posted:Would they have a unified judicial system, or would it be a gigantic clusterfuck of extraterritoriality? Presumably handled the same way the US does, each has its own judicial system for matters within its state, and there is a federal system for cross-state or national matters.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 20:52
|
|
|
There would have to be more than two States to prevent ties. Because giving the tie-breaker to one side would make it as worthless as any other solution.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 20:58
|
|
|
I submit that one party is responsible for the current situation, and am posting with full capitals that, perhaps, the Jewish people are at fault in this conflict, which is being discussed in the Israel/Palestine thread, which is dedicated to discussing the conflict.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 21:04
|
|
corn in the bible posted:I submit that one party is responsible for the current situation, and am posting with full capitals that, perhaps, the Jewish people are at fault in this conflict, which is being discussed in the Israel/Palestine thread, which is dedicated to discussing the conflict. You appear to have made the proper propitiations. Hail satan.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 21:05
|
|
|
b0lt posted:Would they have a unified judicial system, or would it be a gigantic clusterfuck of extraterritoriality? Like evilweasel says, I'm picturing this sort of like a mini US but with parliaments instead of our stupid legislatures. As far as tiebreaking in the parliament, I hadn't thought of that. It doesn't seem likely to me that you're going to have that many things of concern to both states that will come down to an exact 50-50 vote, but it's still something that'd have to be addressed. Maybe make Jerusalem itself a DC-like entity of its own, but give it 3 seats in the national legislature? Actually, that's dumb. How about you need a 2/3 vote to pass legislation in this system. That way there's no way for ties to happen. I think that's almost better because it guarantees that at least a few people from whichever side mostly voted against think it's in the best interest of their people and folks won't feel like they're being dictated to by "the other side plus tiebreaker".
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 21:05
|
|
|
The idea of jerusalem being it's own entity a la DC is actually a pretty cool idea. It's a shame none of the cool ideas being floated will be enacted. Hail satan.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 21:11
|
|
|
LeftistMuslimObama posted:how many times has Bibi made noise about moving the capitol from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem? As far as Netanyahu (and Israel) is concerned, Jerusalem is the capitol. The Knesset is in West Jerusalem, as is the Prime Minister's residence. Tel Aviv is the financial capitol and where the IDF is headquartered. The problem is that Israel forcibly annexed East Jerusalem (which is essentially another city, mostly Arab, also called Jerusalem) and treat the whole thing as one municipality. If not for that no one would care if Jerusalem was Israel's capitol since West Jerusalem is within the '67 borders. LeftistMuslimObama posted:It seems like the big bone of contention with a 1-state solution is that it would make it impossible to have a Jewish homeland because you can't really define a state that way when a huge part of its population isn't Jewish. Additionally, Israelis (rightly or wrongly) fear that if the Arab population of Israel was suddenly the same size as the Jewish population, that acts of revenge or ethnic cleansing might be carried out against them. This is one form of a one-state solution that gets batted around a lot lately - "two nations in one land" - simply because it's looking increasingly unlikely that a realistic two-state solution can ever happen. Unfortunately what you describe would require Israel to give up a ton of sovereignty over things like freedom of movement for Palestinians, water rights, the ability to build where they want, etc. and this won't happen without a fairly radical change in Israel's government (the ZU/Labor would never agree to this, for example). It's a fairly solid idea and probably should have been imposed on both parties in 1948, but it wasn't. And it won't now because, as you said, both parties aren't really negotiating in good faith any more - Israel is keeping the status quo because they like it, the PA is more concerned about their own status quo and staying in "power", and Hamas is off doing their self-destructive thing. What is looking more and more likely is a swing to the right-wing formulation of this, which is best described as Bantustan apartheid - Palestinians get limited autonomy in areas in which they live, less out of Israeli desire to do right by the Palestinians and more to ensure Palestinians never get to vote in Israeli elections and get civil rights in an Israeli state, and all the best land is reserved for Israelis. Surprisingly, Palestinians have not been overwhelmingly enthusiastic about this idea.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 21:24
|
|
|
Ultramega posted:The idea of jerusalem being it's own entity a la DC is actually a pretty cool idea. In the original UN mandate for Israel's establishment, Jerusalem was a free city ruled by the UN. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corpus_separatum_(Jerusalem)
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 21:31
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:You appear to have made the proper propitiations. Disinterested didn't capitalize Satan, and loses posting privileges for one week.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 21:44
|
|
|
LeftistMuslimObama posted:I had a stupid idea that would never work, but I figured I'd air it out here anyway. They basically get along right now but will probably start knife-loving each other again sooner or later. Has anyone ever surveyed Palestinians about how much they'd need to be paid to just move somewhere else?
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 22:07
|
|
|
Gobbeldygook posted:You're talking about something similar to Bosnia. The country is divided into a Bosnian/Crotian and Serbian part. They have three presidents of which one is a Bosnian, one a Croatian, and one a Serbian and they take turns with who is the president. Similarly, the Bosnian equivalent of the Senate is divided equally between ethnic Serbs, Croats, and Bosniaks. Yes, by law no Jew or Roma can ever be president or in the senate. Lebanon is divvied up similarly, between Sunni, Shi'a, Christian, and to a lesser extent Druze. They have never done an official census, for fear of demographic change.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 22:20
|
|
|
TheImmigrant posted:Lebanon is divvied up similarly, between Sunni, Shi'a, Christian, and to a lesser extent Druze. They have never done an official census, for fear of demographic change. Lebanon is one country, it's not really anything like what was described. It does have a government that plays sectarian favorites based on a census from the first half of the 20th century. It's not the most democratic government. It does, however, keep the minorities in play and pieces of its constitution made it into the US attempted solution in Iraq.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 22:23
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:What's the special snowflake word for holding Arabs to a higher standard than Israelis, then? Anti Semetism
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 22:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 05:15 |
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:What's the special snowflake word for holding Arabs to a higher standard than Israelis, then?
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 22:41
|
|