|
hypnorotic posted:Why would they kick out all the West Bank arabs when they could place them in ghettos and make them work in sweatshop factories? Or as janitors and other menial labor? I don't know if Israel could actually function as a first world nation without the arab underclass. Israel used to rely heavily on Arab labour back when the deliberate policy was to create actual bantustans. The first intifada happened and as a result reliance on Arab labour in Israel was deliberately reduced, by opening up more to foreign labour - cheap and easy to control. The second intifada caused another wave of crackdowns on Arab labour so what you'll find is a very risky dirt cheap labour class on tap who are mostly used illicitly or openly in illegal colonies.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 03:31 |
|
|
# ? May 16, 2024 19:07 |
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:Denying people access to food and clean water does not merely make their lives worse, it either forces them to leave or kills them. The Israeli blockade has been loosened since Protective Edge, particularly in regards to construction materials and infrastructure equipment. By all accounts, the main factor delaying Gaza reconstruction is international donors failing to live up to their promises, rather than Israeli obstructionism - materials are being allowed through but there isn't enough money or aid to buy all that's needed. As for food, Egypt's extreme crackdown on the Gaza border under Al-Sisi is really putting the dietary crunch on Gaza right now.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 03:42 |
|
Main Paineframe posted:The Israeli blockade has been loosened since Protective Edge, particularly in regards to construction materials and infrastructure equipment. By all accounts, the main factor delaying Gaza reconstruction is international donors failing to live up to their promises, rather than Israeli obstructionism - materials are being allowed through but there isn't enough money or aid to buy all that's needed. As for food, Egypt's extreme crackdown on the Gaza border under Al-Sisi is really putting the dietary crunch on Gaza right now. That and the massive amount of wreckage from Israeli bombings and lack of access to ways to properly clear the rubble. Of which at least half of the infrastructure consists of.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 04:11 |
|
Crowsbeak posted:A pogrom of the Scale you're suggesting would require a very large campaign of bloodletting by Israel, and would pprobably lead to Israel becoming a bigger pariah then North Korea. If the IDF showed up to trail of tears folks to jordan or whatever, sure. But what we're talking about is just quietly making things unlivable until desperate people do desperate things. They'll either self-deport by any means necessary (to die or become someone else's problem) or commit violence and provided casus belli for the same sorts of violence we've seen so far. Will that work out well for the IDF? Probably not, no military state is as invincible as they think they are, so I'm skeptical that that the resulting violence wouldn't lead to deeply unlivable conditions for the israelis themselves. What I do know is that the international community has been happy to watch Palestine's sources of food and water dry up. The idea that there's some magical threshold of widespread malnutrition and poisonous water where they'll jump in at this point is very silly. I also don't don't think that the international community will do anything to stop large-scale murder of palestinians provided that there's always a casus belli. If you want proof, just look at the responses to me in the last page: "Oh well sure killing a thousand civilians was fine, but surely if they upped that to 5 thousand, we'd do something! Well, maybe 10 thousand?" Like I said, this is a process that's already in progress. We've already justified the murder of a thousand people here, the only thing stopping it from going further is a fear of dead IDF soldiers but choke palestine for long enough and someone will kill an israeli civilian and then it's game on once again.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 06:07 |
|
Like I guess I feel like I"m being unclear here: what I'm describing here is not the "plan" of the Israelis. There is no plan. They're not going to do anything to cross the line internationally because they're not waiting for some moment to execute order 66 or whatever. What I'm describing is just what happens with Israel's current set of interlocking terrible policies, though. It has successfully normalized whatever the gently caress you want to call this thing, and no change in intensity or kind is required to remove Palestinians from greater Israel. The idea that the international community will watch Israel grab up all the arable farmland and potable water in Greater Israel, watch them level Palestinian cities, and then flip the gently caress out about what happens next, what has to happen next, is silly.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 06:13 |
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Actually no - recognizing minorities as different is stage 1. Stage 2 is a group having traits or symbols that can distinguish them as an Other- for example the star of David for Jews. Basically - having a way to identify a minority is a prerequisite for effectively going after them. Plus it seems to be a step by step guide, so yeah if you are going to genocide someone you have to identify them and be aware they exist. I don't see the problem he is having or how this is diluting.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 06:36 |
|
So this thread went back to "I don't need to show a genocide exists, I'm allowed to use whichever words I want cause this is how I liberate palestine". Reminds of Shamir's "For Eretz Israel Lying is Permissible", I think in Islam this is called Taqiyya. And that you liars dare accuse Absurd and me for 'defending G E N O C I D E' (god how much of an shrill idiot do you have to be to repeat that schtick) well you are in fact just relegating yourselves to the level of propagandists, But it's cool, cause your lies are that which will liberate palestine, so way to go, o brave martyr. Edit: literally went from "a wide consensus exists" to "How dare you question the words I chose to use! They have the correct emotional impact!" emanresu tnuocca fucked around with this message at 09:00 on Nov 6, 2015 |
# ? Nov 6, 2015 08:54 |
|
Maybe we can just call it a series of genocidal acts?
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 09:06 |
|
Main Paineframe posted:By all accounts, the main factor delaying Gaza reconstruction is international donors failing to live up to their promises, rather than Israeli obstructionism - materials are being allowed through but there isn't enough money or aid to buy all that's needed. Why the gently caress would you spend your foreign aid budget on building stuff that's just going to serve as target practice for Tzahal? Planet Earth, unfortunately, has no shortage of populations needing foreign aid, but there's no such thing as infinite budget (especially in these debt-obsessed times of austerity and sequestration) and it's more constructive to spend your money on developing infrastructure that will not be bombed to smithereens before the construction workers have even left the building. Whining about international donors not donating is just obfuscation; the real cause is still Israeli policies. The thing Gaza needs is a no-fly-zone to protect it against Israeli depredation; without this military protection building anything is a waste of resources, nothing more. Also lol at "Israel loosened the blockade now that Sisi is enforcing it". Cat Mattress fucked around with this message at 11:13 on Nov 6, 2015 |
# ? Nov 6, 2015 11:09 |
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:So this thread went back to "I don't need to show a genocide exists, I'm allowed to use whichever words I want cause this is how I liberate palestine". I've been very careful to avoid using any word that might compare the situation in Israel to any other situation past, present, and future, or to use words like "cleansing" and "genocide".
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 11:30 |
|
30.5 Days posted:I've been very careful to avoid using any word that might compare the situation in Israel to any other situation past, present, and future, or to use words like "cleansing" and "genocide". Sorry I should have made it clear that I am referring to two or so specific posters, in my zionist rage I might have been somewhat remiss of pointing that out.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 11:34 |
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:Sorry I should have made it clear that I am referring to two or so specific posters, in my zionist rage I might have been somewhat remiss of pointing that out. If it's only two, you should probably name them so they can defend themselves if they want to.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 11:51 |
|
Hong XiuQuan posted:If it's only two, you should probably name them so they can defend themselves if they want to. Oh apologies for not giving the dudes who accuse me of enabling genocide the proper chance to defend themselves. I am of course talking about Woozy and CharlestheHammer.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 12:08 |
|
CharlestheHammer posted:Plus it seems to be a step by step guide, so yeah if you are going to genocide someone you have to identify them and be aware they exist. I don't see the problem he is having or how this is diluting. According to that spectrum, practically every country in the world is in at least stage 3 of genocide, and the US is in stage 4 or 5 of genocide. Boom, there goes practically all the bite from the original sinister statement that Israel is in stage 6 of ~genocide~. Cat Mattress posted:Why the gently caress would you spend your foreign aid budget on building stuff that's just going to serve as target practice for Tzahal? Planet Earth, unfortunately, has no shortage of populations needing foreign aid, but there's no such thing as infinite budget (especially in these debt-obsessed times of austerity and sequestration) and it's more constructive to spend your money on developing infrastructure that will not be bombed to smithereens before the construction workers have even left the building. While I agree in principle, after Protective Edge ended and the UN worked out a deal between Israel and the PA to coordinate the rebuilding of the Gaza Strip, a big international aid conference was held where billions of dollars were pledged toward reconstruction, and that was considered to be the funding for the reconstruction plan. In reality, only a few hundred million of that money has been delivered on, and not only the reconstruction but even the humanitarian aid has ground to a halt due to being funded by nothing more than broken promises. I agree that it's a poor investment, but charity cases usually are. And it's not like "eh, why bother housing the homeless, their home might get destroyed again so let's just leave them on the streets" is exactly the pinnacle of moral development. The two moves were unrelated - Israel's loosening of restrictions came about as part of a deal with the PA, while Sisi tightened them because he came to power and hates Hamas. I'm not sure why you're scoffing at it, either - since Israel does not control Gaza's full border, Egyptian cooperation in the blockade has been an overwhelming factor in determining its actual effects. Sisi's crackdowns have been devastating for Gaza.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 13:52 |
|
Main Paineframe posted:According to that spectrum, practically every country in the world is in at least stage 3 of genocide, and the US is in stage 4 or 5 of genocide. Boom, there goes practically all the bite from the original sinister statement that Israel is in stage 6 of ~genocide~. There's also the 'inescapable irony' of posters who not two pages ago accused us of playing 'genocide apologism' by practicing 'liberal-essentialism' via insisting that Israel is not engaged in genocide by demonstrating that it 'doesn't tick a few boxes in the checklist' now presenting a checklist themselves and attempting to demonstrate that Israel is indeed engaged in genocide because it ticks a few boxes in the checklist... but not those others countries of course, no, they don't tick off enough boxes. Laughable.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 14:07 |
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:There's also the 'inescapable irony' of posters who not two pages ago accused us of playing 'genocide apologism' by practicing 'liberal-essentialism' via insisting that Israel is not engaged in genocide by demonstrating that it 'doesn't tick a few boxes in the checklist' now presenting a checklist themselves and attempting to demonstrate that Israel is indeed engaged in genocide because it ticks a few boxes in the checklist... but not those others countries of course, no, they don't tick off enough boxes. Restating an argument isn't refutation, it actually doesn't even rise to level of engagement. The point that you've failed to grasp once again is that the semantic content of a word is determined by more than just whatever you say it is. If you want to answer the question "is Israel engaged in genocide" you should at least understand in principle how those questions are typically settled. Like you're hugely full of poo poo and way out of your depth and I can already tell how this is going to go by the fact that you haven't actually bothered to quote or argue with the post that you've spent the last two pages being so butthurt over. We're both competent speakers here (well...) so you're going to have to do better than "Israel and its allies aren't willing to use the word to describe their own behavior" if you want to argue that genocide has some fixed immutable meaning that explicitly excludes Israel. You being wrong about super basic poo poo like how words work doesn't invalidate the perspective of numerous people--including those who are actual victims of what is uncontroversially genocide--who don't see any problem with calling a spade and spade.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 15:03 |
|
I'm still waiting for him to accuse people of being antisemitic again.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 15:04 |
|
We'll he's antisemiotic!!!
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 15:06 |
|
Main Paineframe posted:According to that spectrum, practically every country in the world is in at least stage 3 of genocide, and the US is in stage 4 or 5 of genocide. Boom, there goes practically all the bite from the original sinister statement that Israel is in stage 6 of ~genocide~. I think that's actually a pretty useful thing to keep in mind: there's a potential for genocide in just about any society. That said, the potential is much greater and genocide is much more imminent in Israel than in any other Western country I can think of(maybe Greece if Golden Dawn sweeps to power.) Is it really that hard to see genocide in the future when gangs of skinheads are allowed to chant "death to Arabs! death to leftists!" with impunity, when "death to Arabs!" is a common chant in football stadiums, when the government openly refers to its own citizens as "demographic threats", when politicians are allowed to say "this is a white man's country!" and incite a racist mob into lynching minorities, when the PM of Israel equates Palestinians with Nazis(aka, the nec plus ultra of irredeemable, inherent evil) and deliberately provokes Palestinian violence in order to provoke a cycle of violence and hatred? quote:While I agree in principle, after Protective Edge ended and the UN worked out a deal between Israel and the PA to coordinate the rebuilding of the Gaza Strip, a big international aid conference was held where billions of dollars were pledged toward reconstruction, and that was considered to be the funding for the reconstruction plan. In reality, only a few hundred million of that money has been delivered on, and not only the reconstruction but even the humanitarian aid has ground to a halt due to being funded by nothing more than broken promises. I agree that it's a poor investment, but charity cases usually are. And it's not like "eh, why bother housing the homeless, their home might get destroyed again so let's just leave them on the streets" is exactly the pinnacle of moral development. First, you're significantly overstating how much the illegal blockade has been loosened. So far, 1 house has been built since Protective Edge. One. Out of hundreds of thousands destroyed and despite the fact that winter is fast approaching. That's not a result of a lack of financial aid(though that's certainly an outrage in and of itself); it's the result of the blockade. Israel may have jiggered with the details of the blockade a bit, but the fact is that the blockade is still designed to cause civilian suffering and to prevent the Gaza Strip infrastructure from being meaningfully rebuilt(which again goes to how at this pace Gaza is set to be uninhabitable by 2020 and Israel has done nothing to prevent that; in other words, that's what Israel's desired outcome seems to be.) Secondly, you can't treat the blockade as being 2 separate, unrelated phenomena. Yes, Egypt controls the Rafah crossing but Egypt is a military dictatorship and Egypt's military has been deeply intertwined with, voire subservient to the Israeli state since the 70s. Israel is Egypt's major supporter and patron and they dictate that Gaza be under blockade(even when Morsi was president, the blockade more or less stayed despite massive popular opposition due to pressure from Israel via the military) though of course Sisi has his own reasons for participating(crushing the MB). The fact that an Arab dictatorship is complicit in an Israeli policy doesn't subtract from Israel's culpability; it only adds disgrace to the Egyptian government's account.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 15:37 |
|
Woozy posted:Restating an argument isn't refutation, it actually doesn't even rise to level of engagement. The point that you've failed to grasp once again is that the semantic content of a word is determined by more than just whatever you say it is. If you want to answer the question "is Israel engaged in genocide" you should at least understand in principle how those questions are typically settled. Like you're hugely full of poo poo and way out of your depth and I can already tell how this is going to go by the fact that you haven't actually bothered to quote or argue with the post that you've spent the last two pages being so butthurt over. Repeating a lie doesn't make it a truth, putting it in italics doesn't either, you are seriously invoking 'numerous people' as some infallible appeal to authority. I already told you it would be nice if you could start naming scholars who support this view before you qualify it as uncontroversial. heck, can you even demonstrate a consensus concerning israeli genocide among Palestinian scholars? I'm gonna bet you won't be able to do any of that, so you basically can keep repeating this same line but it doesn't change the fact that you're presenting your dumb minority opinion as something which it isn't. if that wasn't clear: you're a liar, if people choose to buy your bullshit that's fine, they are likely idiots, but you are still just a simple liar. You've already abandoned any attempt to support your definition for genocide short of it just kinda feeling right and that you believe it signifies that sort of 'immediate call to action' you wish to conversationally convey when you are talking about how Israel bad and that attempts to actually use the common definition for the word are used by dirty hasbarists and their allies to discourage an immediate international action, that's a nice laughable position to have but it barely merits a discussion as you've already made it plainly clear that the meanings of words are to be used as a political weapon whenever the situation is severe enough to call for it. Now, obviously, your position is completely idiotic but perhaps it should also be noted that humanity actually has a lovely track record when it comes to intervening to prevent genocides, so even if you do get everyone in the world to concede that Israel is engaged in very slow burn G-E-N-O-C-I-D-E, this won't necessarily mean that the world will take any significant action, so your crusade against words meaning things is ultimately likely quite futile. CommieGIR posted:I'm still waiting for him to accuse people of being antisemitic again. I appreciate your cheerleading but I do recall you not being able to challenge any of my points yesterday.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 15:46 |
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:I appreciate your cheerleading but I do recall you not being able to challenge any of my points yesterday. And multiple people disagree with yours, so maybe you should withhold some of that smug 'I'm right, your wrong' demeanor. It's not as if you've flown in and the majority agree with you, multiple people have issues with your claims as well.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 15:50 |
|
Nosfereefer posted:Maybe we can just call it a series of genocidal acts? Nah don't give into his dumb handwringing, call a spade a spade and let him try and refute it. If the topic so far is anything to go by, it will at least be funny watching him try.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 15:54 |
|
CommieGIR posted:And multiple people disagree with yours, so maybe you should withhold some of that smug 'I'm right, your wrong' demeanor. It's not as if you've flown in and the majority agree with you, multiple people have issues with your claims as well. No, not really, only those who think that the actual definition of the word is not important because "checklists", are you now in that camp as well? So far the prominent arguments supporting this 'uncontroversially accepted' notion of Israeli genocide are: 1. It doesn't fit the definition nor enjoys any sort of consensus but definitions are made by first world oppressors and the allies of zionists. -This is what you believe I gather? 2. Genocide isn't about killing ethnic\religious\cultural groups, it's a set of events which if exist in unison might constitute more and more severe genocide. -This notion was in my opinion thoroughly disputed by Main Paineframe. 3. Definitions aren't important, using words to evoke action is. - Which as I noted, is not even an argument about the definition of genocide, it's an argument about how it's ok to lie for a good cause. 4. At the current rate stretched to an arbitrarily period of time Israel is likely to completely exterminate every single palestinian in Gaza, therefore this is genocide. - Sure if that happens that would be genocide, only there's no guarantee any of this is true, despite the sorry state Gaza has been in since the war people have not been dying in droves and the population is still growing. 5. At the current rate stretched to a century from today Israeli policy is sure to kill of every palestinian in the west bank. -This is pure conjecture, I do not presume to have such predictive abilities nor do I believe in historical determinism. Are there more "refutations"? Did I miss some? Is this enough handwringing? Now sure I may have done disservice to some of these arguments through my indelicate strawmanning, but this is generally the gist of things. In anyway, if you're just gonna hide behind the skirts of other posters and cheerlead while having no more contributions short of your semi nonsensical posts from yesterday well, just let me know. CharlestheHammer posted:Nah don't give into his dumb handwringing, call a spade a spade and let him try and refute it. If the topic so far is anything to go by, it will at least be funny watching him try. This one demonstrates positions 1 & 3.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 16:12 |
|
I hate to bring up the Nazi comparison, but here it is: At what point would you have considered what the Nazis did genocide? They didn't just up and start with gassing the Jews, in fact the majority of the death pogrom didn't even kick off till the middle of World War 2 when the Final Solution was actually proposed, up until that point, they took actions very much in the vein of what the Israelis do: Open air prisons with ongoing sieges (Warsaw) Denial of rights and persecution (Civil Service Ban) Progressive seizure of property and rights Ultra Right faction controlling government that dehumanizes the victim populace To say that what the Israelis are doing is not genocide ignore the issue that they are taking actions that most genocides follow before the actual genocide actions. Does it HAVE to actually become the full on, guns blazing genocide before you are happy? What's the point in defining genocide to help prevent them if you are unwilling to recognize the warning signs? I don't care if you are not pro-Israeli, that's not the point, the point is recognizing the dangerous signs that are already present and not handwaving away the very distinct possibilities. That is not to say they are suddenly going to build death camps tomorrow, or start with death squads, but they've already riled up the populace, the voice of reason is shut out in the Israeli Government. Its all there.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 16:18 |
|
Please stop genociding this thread.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 16:20 |
|
You know, in these last several pages of argument, I don't think I saw anyone post the actual, UN-defined, definition of genocide:Article 2 of the UN genocide convention of 1948 posted:Genocide is defined as any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. There is absolutely no way for Israel's West Bank policies to fit this description. What's going on there clearly constitutes ethnic cleansing, but words have meaning. Do you believe Israel will pursue Palestinians who flee to Jordan to bring about their destruction? You could argue that Gaza fits under "deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part," I suppose, but there has to be deliberate genocidal intent, rather than merely neglect and a complete disregard for human life. If you think there's global consensus that the former is the case, I'd really like to see it backed up.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 16:35 |
|
acually mom it's called ephebophilia just to recap, thanks for the confirmation that Israel is knowingly pursuing a campaign of mass ethnic cleansing that in cases may amount to genocide. Death to Israel
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 16:36 |
|
Kajeesus posted:You know, in these last several pages of argument, I don't think I saw anyone post the actual, UN-defined, definition of genocide: I posted the ICJ's view on the line between Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing: quote:The term 'ethnic cleansing' has frequently been employed to refer to the events in Bosnia and Herzegovina which are the subject of this case ... General Assembly resolution 47/121 referred in its Preamble to 'the abhorrent policy of 'ethnic cleansing', which is a form of genocide', as being carried on in Bosnia and Herzegovina. ... It [i.e. ethnic cleansing] can only be a form of genocide within the meaning of the [Genocide] Convention, if it corresponds to or falls within one of the categories of acts prohibited by Article II of the Convention. Neither the intent, as a matter of policy, to render an area "ethnically homogeneous", nor the operations that may be carried out to implement such policy, can as such be designated as genocide: the intent that characterizes genocide is "to destroy, in whole or in part" a particular group, and deportation or displacement of the members of a group, even if effected by force, is not necessarily equivalent to destruction of that group, nor is such destruction an automatic consequence of the displacement. This is not to say that acts described as 'ethnic cleansing' may never constitute genocide, if they are such as to be characterized as, for example, 'deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part', contrary to Article II, paragraph (c), of the Convention, provided such action is carried out with the necessary specific intent (dolus specialis), that is to say with a view to the destruction of the group, as distinct from its removal from the region. As the ICTY has observed, while 'there are obvious similarities between a genocidal policy and the policy commonly known as 'ethnic cleansing' ' (Krstić, IT-98-33-T, Trial Chamber Judgment, August 2, 2001, para. 562), yet '[a] clear distinction must be drawn between physical destruction and mere dissolution of a group. The expulsion of a group or part of a group does not in itself suffice for genocide.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 16:40 |
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:No, not really, only those who think that the actual definition of the word is not important because "checklists", are you now in that camp as well? What no it doesn't, I am using the word as it is commonly used but mostly in cases were the perpetrators don't exist anymore which is a bit hypocritical (or at the least cowardly) in my opinion. I am sorry the fact you don't know what words mean upsets you so much.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 17:12 |
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSKQ3ZNQ_O8&t=17s
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 17:20 |
|
Okay, since unsupported statements of what you believe to be the truth are apparently sufficient for debate here, here's mine: Israel's goal is the ethnic cleansing of Israel itself (and East Jerusalem) of Palestinians, as well as the ethnic cleansing of Gaza and the West Bank. Additionally, it also seeks to put cooperative, peaceful governments in power over Palestinians, and dislodge powerful militant groups with military force, attacks on their popularity and legitimacy, and collective punishment against civiliand that support them. The main method for internal ethnic cleansing is unfair residency laws and annoying restrictions that will tend to diminish the number of Palestinians in Israel, and the main method for cleansing the occupied territories is to so thoroughly diminish their sovereignty and negotiating position that they can no longer realistically claim a state of their own, after which Israel will be able to develop political leverage to negotiate a deal for the expulsion of Palestinians to a nearby Arab country (in much the same way as Zionist groups negotiated with Arab countries for the expulsion of Jews to Israel). FreshlyShaven posted:First, you're significantly overstating how much the illegal blockade has been loosened. So far, 1 house has been built since Protective Edge. One. Out of hundreds of thousands destroyed and despite the fact that winter is fast approaching. That's not a result of a lack of financial aid(though that's certainly an outrage in and of itself); it's the result of the blockade. Israel may have jiggered with the details of the blockade a bit, but the fact is that the blockade is still designed to cause civilian suffering and to prevent the Gaza Strip infrastructure from being meaningfully rebuilt(which again goes to how at this pace Gaza is set to be uninhabitable by 2020 and Israel has done nothing to prevent that; in other words, that's what Israel's desired outcome seems to be.) First of all, the whole "one home has been rebuilt" is the same poo poo people pulled against the Red Cross, and it's just as misleading here. The building of permanent housing has been sluggish (but is ongoing), but in the meantime, enough temporary housing to house hundreds of thousands of people has been erected. The slow pace of rebuilding has mostly been attributed to Palestinian political infighting (the PA is in charge of Gaza rebuilding, not Hamas), corruption, lack of funds, and other problems (like reports of people reselling their construction materials on the black market rather than using them to rebuild). Israel's role in the approval of reconstruction projects has rankled some people, but humanitarian officials and people involved in the reconstruction process have consistently stated that Israel is letting the needed materials through but that there simply isn't enough money to pay for them. Israel certainly is the one that destroyed Gaza in the first place, but the failure to rebuild over the past year and a half is a worldwide problem. That's why aid organizations have suddenly been so doom and gloom with the predictions since about April - they're trying to motivate donors, since the world doesn't seem to care about Gaza enough to even send over the money they promised when Gaza was dominating the news cycle. You guys are throwing around the word "genocide" because you feel it'll motivate the world to step in and politically intervene, but the world doesn't even care enough to throw some humanitarian aid money Gaza's way. http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/08/23/world/middleeast/one-year-after-war-people-of-gaza-still-sit-among-the-ruins.html?referer=&_r=0 quote:The men of Shejaiya still come daily to sit vigil in the desolate ruins of their neighborhood, drinking tea and playing chess. But these days, there are also clusters of construction workers on Shejaiya’s dirt paths, finally pouring a few cement foundations and hammering together wood planks.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 17:26 |
|
I think Syria is looking like a prime choice to pull off a mass expulsion to, just got to destroy ISIS, make sure Assad is comfy, and get those wheels turning to move the undesirables. Also no way will any more money or aid flow to Palestinians. Intifada is on.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 17:31 |
|
You are the the one that started this unsupportive argument with your whole HAMAS thing. So get off your high horse mate.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 17:32 |
|
Main Paineframe posted:While I agree in principle, after Protective Edge ended and the UN worked out a deal between Israel and the PA to coordinate the rebuilding of the Gaza Strip, a big international aid conference was held where billions of dollars were pledged toward reconstruction, and that was considered to be the funding for the reconstruction plan. In reality, only a few hundred million of that money has been delivered on, and not only the reconstruction but even the humanitarian aid has ground to a halt due to being funded by nothing more than broken promises. I agree that it's a poor investment, but charity cases usually are. And it's not like "eh, why bother housing the homeless, their home might get destroyed again so let's just leave them on the streets" is exactly the pinnacle of moral development. Oh go gently caress yourself. Israel has proven time and time again that it will destroy any infrastructure that allows Palestinians to live at anything above sub-substinance level. That is entirely on the Israeli people. Also using the ridiculous guidelines most Zionist posters are using in this thread the Holocaust wasn't genocide because the Nazis fed the people in concentration camps.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 18:57 |
|
Kajeesus posted:Do you believe Israel will pursue Palestinians who flee to Jordan to bring about their destruction? Hitler urged Jewish people to emigrate from Germany, hence not a genocide. Good to see Netanyahu's revisionism of the Holocaust swiftly made it into mainstream Israeli society.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 19:02 |
|
uninterrupted posted:Oh go gently caress yourself. Israel has proven time and time again that it will destroy any infrastructure that allows Palestinians to live at anything above sub-substinance level. That is entirely on the Israeli people. When's the last time Israel bombed infrastructure in the West Bank? The problem with pointing to Gaza as evidence for Israeli plans for the Palestinian people is that the same policies are not applied to West Bank or East Jerusalem, just Gaza. Considering other contextual information, like the fact that the major difference in treatment began in 2007, it's an uphill battle to claim that the main motivations for the Gaza blockade and bombings are racial hatred for all Palestinians rather than political and military opposition to Hamas.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 19:08 |
|
Main Paineframe posted:When's the last time Israel bombed infrastructure in the West Bank? In the West Bank, they can't bomb infrastructure because then settlers would be inconvenienced. Instead, they designate the infrastructure to be there only for the settlers. The end result is the same, though: Palestinians are denied infrastructure, arable lands, and potable water; in one case it's because these things are bombed and in the other it's because these things are walled off and guarded by angry riflemen.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 19:41 |
|
Main Paineframe posted:When's the last time Israel bombed infrastructure in the West Bank? Check points and Israeli first access to said infrastructure is a hell of a thing.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 19:44 |
|
Still clinging to the HAMAS thing huh?
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 21:30 |
|
|
# ? May 16, 2024 19:07 |
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:Repeating a lie doesn't make it a truth, putting it in italics doesn't either, you are seriously invoking 'numerous people' as some infallible appeal to authority. I already told you it would be nice if you could start naming scholars who support this view before you qualify it as uncontroversial. heck, can you even demonstrate a consensus concerning israeli genocide among Palestinian scholars? I'm gonna bet you won't be able to do any of that, so you basically can keep repeating this same line but it doesn't change the fact that you're presenting your dumb minority opinion as something which it isn't. if that wasn't clear: you're a liar, if people choose to buy your bullshit that's fine, they are likely idiots, but you are still just a simple liar. See this is how I know you aren't actually reading my posts. The "uncontroversial" genocides are the ones that aren't controversial (weird!). So like the big obvious example would be Holocaust survivors who signed a letter stating explicitly: People who have an interest in the topic beyond just mining it for smugness posted:We must raise our collective voices and use our collective power to bring about an end to all forms of racism, including the ongoing genocide of Palestinian people. There's also the thousands of American Indian activists who appear every year to express unqualified solidarity with Palestinians whenever Israel does something horrible enough to make news. There's Armenian student solidarity groups supporting BDS who would probably describe this whole argument as depressingly familiar. Obviously Israel's treatment of the Palestinians is "controversially genocidal". It's been an on-going argument for years! Of course, the answer to the question "who agrees that Israel is guilty of genocide" really depends less on who you ask and more on whether you're sincerely wondering or just pulling the usual D&D bluff of insisting someone write you an entire thesis and hoping they'll give up. Just loving google it, dude. At the very least the question of genocide is an open one. Opponents of the view tend to argue, as you are, by feigning indignation over the question because again it's a lot more appealing than having to utter words "it's merely ethnic cleansing", or quibbling over petty bullshit like "oh well Israel says they aren't genocidal so you can't prove that they actually intend to eradicate literally every Palestinian." quote:You've already abandoned any attempt to support your definition for genocide short of it just kinda feeling right and that you believe it signifies that sort of 'immediate call to action' you wish to conversationally convey when you are talking about how Israel bad and that attempts to actually use the common definition for the word are used by dirty hasbarists and their allies to discourage an immediate international action, that's a nice laughable position to have but it barely merits a discussion as you've already made it plainly clear that the meanings of words are to be used as a political weapon whenever the situation is severe enough to call for it. "Just kind of feeling right" is actually the way people who aren't terminally loving goony experience semantic meaning.
|
# ? Nov 6, 2015 22:14 |