|
Begin and Ben-Gurion loving hated eachother but they saw eye to eye when it came to how to dispense with the native population.
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 00:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 16:34 |
|
|
Ultramega posted:Begin and Ben-Gurion loving hated eachother but they saw eye to eye when it came to how to dispense with the native population. The Jews are the native population of Israel.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 00:46
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:The Jews are the native population of Israel. Judaism is *a* native religion to Israel, among many.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 00:53
|
|
|
So we switched from "the nations founders" to "weren't nobodies, and were relevant to the nations history"? k
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 01:04
|
|
|
RIP, I/P thread. I really did try, but now it's beyond my control.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 01:10
|
|
|
lol if u defend the directed genocide of a people just lol
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 01:51
|
|
|
I don't think it was brought up here but Trump did sign an executive order this morning directing the State Department to start the process of relocating the American Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem. Not shocking, but now it's officially happening.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 02:26
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:I don't think it was brought up here but Trump did sign an executive order this morning directing the State Department to start the process of relocating the American Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem. Not shocking, but now it's officially happening. I can't find a source to verify that this has actually happened. When did he actually do this, considering he wasn't yet President until noon EST?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 02:36
|
|
|
GaussianCopula posted:The approach of trying to fight Israel, something the Palestinians and their Arab backers have tried since 1949 clearly isn't working for them and therefore they need to change their strategy, if they, the Palestinian leadership, want to better the situation of their people. In my opinion it would be better for the average Palestinian to accept that yes, you are not going to get East-Jerusalem (or any part of Jerusalem) and there will be no right of return and yes, it's not allowed to murder any Israelis, no matter whether they wear an IDF uniform or not and terrorist organisations like Hamas have to either radically change their program or be outlawed. At that point Israel would be forced to accept a two state solution, because all of their major demands are met and the Palestinians can start to actually build a real life for themselves without being permanent refugees or living in a war zone. First of all, you need to have a think about your tone. Only a small minority of Palestinians have any involvement in any kind of militant action. When you talk about Palestinians as a whole rather than Palestinian militants or Palestinian terrorists, you're basically doing the I/P equivalent of "Why are the Blacks always committing crimes???" Moving on from that though, what you've described has only a passing resemblance to the history of the I/P conflict. For instance Israel has rejected peace offers that meet all their major demands like the Arab Peace Plan because the government doesn't actually want to compromise (As if Netanyahu being filmed bragging about ruining the peace process wasn't evidence enough). You're presenting a false dichtomy because Israel isn't interested in peace. The use of military force to put pressure on the other side to engage in peace is a classic tactic that has had success in South Africa and Northern Ireland. Fatah and the Arab League have made offers and been willing to make commitments which match or even exceed the standards that basically every single country on the face of the earth agrees should be the basis for a successful peace process. Israel has never agreed or suggested a plan which meets those criteria, its only suggestions being ones which involve ethnic cleansing and oppression as the continuing status quo. More than that you aren't really making any points, just repeating yourself. You say: "it's not allowed to murder any Israelis, no matter whether they wear an IDF uniform or not" Well why isn't it, besides the fact you say so? Under international law soldiers are legitimate military targets. Simply saying that they're not allowed to do it isn't actually a point. Also you've very blase about ethnic cleansing here. "Hey, you got ethnically cleansed out of Jerusalem, just accept it". Xander77 posted:Are you talking about Lehi? The people who were literally shot at by the Jewish founders of Israel? The people who won 13 seats (out of 120) in the first national election? The people who were systematically ostracized from participation in the Israeli government and its benefits? The people who spent 30 years as a permanent opposition party before the socialists hosed up enough to let them into power? In the 1948-49 Arab–Israeli War the IDF/Haganah committed a litany of war crimes. Commanders (including people like Future PM Yigal Allon) had orders issued to them by the Israeli leadership calling for them to specifically carry out ethnic cleansing. This leadership went on to form the Labour government that lead the country for decades. The foundation of Israel - the war where it gained independence - was literally based on the use of government sanctioned terror and murder to force an exodus of Arabs. This is a matter of historical record and has been known for about 30 years now since the actual orders confirming this were declassified and dug up and dispelled any doubt. This was initially done by Benny Morris in The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem although i'd suggest reading the abbreviated version and criticism of Morris's work in Norman Finkelstein's Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestinian Conflict as Morris is quite a dissembler in some regards and it might not always be obvious how his prejudices are biasing the work. I can quote a passage from a relevant book if you need the proof.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 02:37
|
|
|
the diversity of hakimashous bad opinions and takes range from being mad at palestinians for resisting occupation to getting his dick hard at the idea of chelsea manning being murdered (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 02:44
|
|
|
GaussianCopula posted:That's why I'm talking about elected officials. This might seem like a really cutting point, but it isn't if you understand the situation. Hamas were committing terrorist attacks before the election and Hamas were going to committing terrorist attacks after the election regardless of the results. The election did not effect whether not Hamas was going to attack Israel and should not be viewed as a a referendum on Palestinian's opinions on terrorist attacks against Israel because that doesn't make sense. 2 other important things to keep in mind: 1) Hamas was not actually elected and the related party list did not in anyway campaign on terrorism against Israel. Their electoral manifesto was almost entirely focused on domestic issues (Even before the elections Hamas was well known for spending the majority of its money on humanitarian efforts) and contained only a brief mention of armed struggle against Israel with no mention of terrorist attacks or the destruction of Israel, something that at the time was noted as putting Hamas in a more moderate position as "armed struggle against (oppressor nation)" would also describe organisations that are well regarded like the ANC. 2) Fatah was notoriously corrupt and turning the entire country into even more of a failed pseudo state than it otherwise would have been with just Israel's ongoing occupation. The Palestinian people were desperate for a different government and Hamas was the only party with a strong enough standing to content. Besides, in terms of elected officials the problem is Israel.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 02:50
|
|
|
BTW, just noticed there is a new B'Tselem report out which touched on Israel's ethnic cleansing. Link to report on the sidebar on the right. "The report B’Tselem published today shows how Israel has been taking over Palestinian rural space, fragmenting it, dispossessing its residents of land and water, and handing over these areas to settlers. The process is illustrated through a case study of three villages in the Nablus District - ‘Azmut, Deir al-Hatab and Salem - telling what these communities have undergone since Israel established the Elon Moreh settlement nearby. Through this case study, the report illustrates a broader policy Israel has been implementing throughout the West Bank for decades, and in which the settlers play a key role."
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 02:52
|
|
|
spaceships posted:the diversity of hakimashous bad opinions and takes range from being mad at palestinians for resisting occupation to getting his dick hard at the idea of chelsea manning being murdered Thats a lie.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 03:02
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:I can't find a source to verify that this has actually happened. When did he actually do this, considering he wasn't yet President until noon EST?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 03:07
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:He signed it as one of the first executive orders. They all of these pre-prepared for him to sign as soon as he was sworn in. Again, I'd like confirmation. It's not listed in compilations like this, for example.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 03:09
|
|
|
It is never too late for the Palestinians to disarm and accept the teachings of people like Gandhi and Dr King about non-violence. Terrorism, especially islamist terrorism, is going to be less rewarding than ever before now that Trump is president. At least with Hillary there wouldnt have been the anti-Muslim bigotry that there is with Trump and his people. 4 years is a long time and a lot of bad things can happen. Being unwavering in support of Israel is an easy, no cost way for Trump to give himself cover for other forms of bigotry by saying "See, I am absolutely not an anti-semite. Ask any Jew, I stand with Israel 100%" hakimashou fucked around with this message at 03:34 on Jan 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 03:20
|
|
|
the jews
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 03:26
|
|
|
Avshalom posted:the jews banned for anti-semitism
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 03:30
|
|
|
team overhead smash posted:The foundation of Israel - the war where it gained independence - was literally based on the use of government sanctioned terror and murder to force an exodus of Arabs. This is a matter of historical record and has been known for about 30 years now since the actual orders confirming this were declassified and dug up and dispelled any doubt. This was initially done by Benny Morris in The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem although i'd suggest reading the abbreviated version and criticism of Morris's work in Norman Finkelstein's Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestinian Conflict as Morris is quite a dissembler in some regards and it might not always be obvious how his prejudices are biasing the work. "Here's a book by a respected scholar which proves my point, but don't read it instead read this nutty polemicist" isn't a very good piece of advice. Especially because Morris's conclusion in 'The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem' is that there wasn't any organized or systematic policy of expulsion endorsed by Israeli authorities and that they happened on a piecemeal and ad hoc basis instead. Don't cite a source when it argues against the exact point you're claiming it makes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 03:32
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:"Here's a book by a respected scholar which proves my point, but don't read it instead read this nutty polemicist" isn't a very good piece of advice. Especially because Morris's conclusion in 'The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem' is that there wasn't any organized or systematic policy of expulsion endorsed by Israeli authorities and that they happened on a piecemeal and ad hoc basis instead. Don't cite a source when it argues against the exact point you're claiming it makes. Benny Morris is a literal war crimes advocate, I can dig up quotes of him arguing that Israel should have committed more atrocities and war crimes so as to have foregone the continuing conflict. I can't speak for you, but I wouldn't respect anyone that advocates for war crimes. However I'm still willing to listen to his points if they're valid - but as Finkelstein shows they're not. The absence of Arab sources (and lack of awareness of this), the taking of Israeli official statements at face value, the bias with which he describes acts depending on the race of the perpatrators, basic errors in his own work, etc. Also Morris's conclusions are precisely what I was reffering to "Morris is quite a dissembler in some regards and it might not always be obvious how his prejudices are biasing the work". If you feel that Morris's work is reputable and Finkelstein's criticism isn't, please feel free to give your rationale for why right here and now. It's a sourced piece of work by an experienced academic so give your reason for dismissing it. All you've done is call Finkelstein a slightly mean name, which doesn't provide any reason to disregard his work. I have Image and Reality in front of me right now so I can look up anything you want to reference. If you've actually got the book, read it and developed valid criticisms and rationales why you don't believe Finkelstein's case it then lay it out. Otherwise if all you're doing is disparaging someone's position because it's critical of israeli and you can't present any rationale beyond it not agreeing with your worldview - likely never having even read the book - that's racist as hell. Edit: Also Morris's claim was that there wasn't a master plan in place to ethnically cleanse the Palestinians. He doesn't claim they there wasn't an organised or systematic policy - just that it evolved in an ad-hoc way. Morris himself provides evidence of orders going down the chain of command explicitly ordering senior military officers to expel arabs. That is by definition organised and trying to claim otherwise just shwos you have no idea what you're talking about. team overhead smash fucked around with this message at 04:02 on Jan 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 03:58
|
|
|
edit: i was too late, disregard.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 03:58
|
|
|
Of course there was widespread ethnic cleansing and that's a matter of historical record. There was plenty of that going the other way too, like expelling Jews from what became East Jerusalem. Points about historical injustice don't really have great bearing on what's a proper policy for today. Especially since the land itself, if not all world history, has an epic record of mass ethnic cleansings, so giving any of them any special weight is arbitrary. Do what makes practical sense in the year 2017.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 04:26
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:Of course there was widespread ethnic cleansing and that's a matter of historical record. There was plenty of that going the other way too, like expelling Jews from what became East Jerusalem. Points about historical injustice don't really have great bearing on what's a proper policy for today. Especially since the land itself, if not all world history, has an epic record of mass ethnic cleansings, so giving any of them any special weight is arbitrary. Do what makes practical sense in the year 2017. Looking forward to reading this post again next year with the date changed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 04:39
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:RIP, I/P thread. I really did try, but now it's beyond my control. Just wanted to thank you for all the work you did to make the I/P thread what it was and keep the usual 'poo poo and run' crew from destroying the place. Sucks to see you were also one of mods lost to Lowtax's new crusade.  I mostly lurked the thread, but it's been an incredibly useful source of information, news, and education on the conflict during your tenure. Hopefully the "R.I.P" comment doesn't mean the new mods plan to shut it down or open the floodgates to the kind of poo poo that helped kill the last one.Kim Jong Il posted:Of course there was widespread ethnic cleansing and that's a matter of historical record. There was plenty of that going the other way too, like expelling Jews from what became East Jerusalem. Points about historical injustice don't really have great bearing on what's a proper policy for today. Especially since the land itself, if not all world history, has an epic record of mass ethnic cleansings, so giving any of them any special weight is arbitrary. Do what makes practical sense in the year 2017. Points of historical injustice have a pretty big bearing on policies today when those injustices created the current political situation and stem from the same goals that current policies of ethnic cleansing come from. It's also not really 'arbitrary' to give weight to the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in Jerusalem currently happening right now and not to Jews expelled from the city decades ago when talking about what makes practical sense in 2017. Gorgo Primus fucked around with this message at 06:28 on Jan 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 06:20
|
|
|
Gorgo Primus posted:Just wanted to thank you for all the work you did to make the I/P thread what it was and keep the usual 'poo poo and run' crew from destroying the place. Sucks to see you were also one of mods lost to Lowtax's new crusade. For the I/P thread to turn to poo poo, all that is needed is for good mods to do nothing (because there's like one active mod now).
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 06:22
|
|
|
Gorgo Primus posted:
Certainly it has explanatory power, but emotional grievances are loving useless given that Naftali Bennett could give you a million reasons why the settlers are oppressed and the true victims. If it's on the table that inconsistent treatment is permissible, how do you think that's going to work in practice given that Israel has a monopoly on state power? Exactly what's happening now. There's a distinct possibility that the occupation could end, all that precludes negotiations from resuming are a handful of seats in the Knesset. It's very unlikely that you'll find redress for history, and in fact attempting to do so directly harms efforts to end the war and occupation. It enables and empowers right wing nationalists on both sides, and given that the Israeli public will never accept large numbers of refugees returning, that demand is akin to advocating for endless war.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 08:17
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:Of course there was widespread ethnic cleansing and that's a matter of historical record. There was plenty of that going the other way too, like expelling Jews from what became East Jerusalem. Points about historical injustice don't really have great bearing on what's a proper policy for today. Especially since the land itself, if not all world history, has an epic record of mass ethnic cleansings, so giving any of them any special weight is arbitrary. Do what makes practical sense in the year 2017. Which is trying to stop Israel's current and ongoing policy of ethnic cleansing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 12:08
|
|
|
Is it really that hard to understand that after the Holocaust the world's one and only Jewish state where Jews are safe would want to remain a Jewish state? The Holocaust is real, it really happened. So is the rest of the blood soaked history of crime against Jews. There is nothing the Jewish people won't do to protect themselves after what they were put through by the Europeans.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 12:16
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:Is it really that hard to understand that after the Holocaust the world's one and only Jewish state where Jews are safe would want to remain a Jewish state? No, I understand racism, war crimes, ethnic cleansing etc pretty well. Wanting racial purity is not a valid rationale for ethnic cleansing. There are no valid rationales for ethnic cleansing. Don't try and rationalise war crimes as okay. You'll note that your explanation also waves away any issues with Palestinian terrorism if the same is applied to them. "Is it really that hard to understand that after being oppressed for decades, being born into a life of misery as Israel tries to ethnically cleanse them, Palestinians would not fight in any way they could for freedom"? team overhead smash fucked around with this message at 12:30 on Jan 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 12:28
|
|
|
I'm sure Muhammad Atta liked to think he was some kind of freedom fighter too. A lot of criminals don't believe that what they are doing is wrong, but that's won't save HAMAS, there is a war on terror going on still and they have chosen to fight on the wrong side of it. You don't reward terrorism, you make it worse for people who resort to it. Like if it's bad, and they do terrorism, you don't make it better you make it even worse. When they give up, disarm, and renounce terrorism, then they get a seat at the table. Incentivizing bad behavior encourages it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 12:41
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:I'm sure Muhammad Atta liked to think he was some kind of freedom fighter too. And it's because Israel didn't give Palestinians any alternatives. If refuse any and all peace overtures of the other side and make it clear that no peaceful, political or democratic approach will cause the Israeli State to change its policies, the only people who will gain any sort of legitimacy in the eyes of the Palestinians are the violent extremists like Hamas. And indeed when people see that Israel will continue to attack peaceful Palestinians just living out their lives, uproot their olive trees their ancestors have cultivated for generation, and demolish their farmsteads, who do you think those people will turn to? The PA, who have never gotten a single concession from Israel and indeed have overseen a massive loss of land for the Palestinians in the West Bank, or Hamas who at least fight back before they lose everything? It's your own goddamn fault, this violence. Stop stealing land and colonizing places that never ever belonged to Israel, and actually reach out to the Palestinians and you'll see fewer knife attacks. Collective punishment does not make the punished your loving friends you dipshit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 14:31
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:There is nothing the Jewish people won't do to protect themselves after what they were put through by the Europeans. The Jewish plan to protect themselves: steal land through massacres and expulsions to get all your neighbors to hate you. Genius! hakimashou posted:You don't reward terrorism, you make it worse for people who resort to it. I agree and that's why the state of Israel, which was created by terrorists through terrorism, should be dismantled.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 14:42
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:There's a distinct possibility that the occupation could end, all that precludes negotiations from resuming are a handful of seats in the Knesset. It's very unlikely that you'll find redress for history, and in fact attempting to do so directly harms efforts to end the war and occupation. It enables and empowers right wing nationalists on both sides, and given that the Israeli public will never accept large numbers of refugees returning, that demand is akin to advocating for endless war. Resuming negotiations is meaningless with Netanyahu in control. He's repeatedly made clear that he considers a truly independent Palestinian state to be unacceptable, and that a two-state solution would require so many "security assurances" that it would be essentially indistinguishable from a bantustan. hakimashou posted:You don't reward terrorism, you make it worse for people who resort to it. Like if it's bad, and they do terrorism, you don't make it better you make it even worse. When they give up, disarm, and renounce terrorism, then they get a seat at the table. Incentivizing bad behavior encourages it. This is like the exact opposite of how to respond to terrorism. Collective punishment, aside from being illegal and immoral, just encourages more people to join the terrorists and aid them in their fight against the regime oppressing them. Besides, punishing terrorism is pointless if peaceful conduct isn't rewarded - the Palestinians don't believe for a second that Israel will make meaningful concessions if they refrain from violence, and previous periods of peace have done plenty to reinforce that belief.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 14:46
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:Someone in the british politics thread said that it seemed like 9/11 was a big factor in Irish terrorism ending. The PIRA had fully disarmed by August 2001 so I'm not clear how a massive terrorist attack in the US a month later was a big factor? Terrorism in Northern Ireland as a form of armed struggle intended to remove British governance had quietened down from where it was in the '70s and '80s. What put an end to the Troubles was a change in British government policy that began seriously negotiating with Republican groups. Tony Blair's peace initiatives, which dealt with figures who had been terrorists themselves and began accepting Republican figures before they had engaged in disarmament, was what really ended it. That peace process took quite a while to get going and what is probably most telling is that it required the British government to bring Republican figures into joint governance prior to them actually disarming or carrying out many key moves. The British were willing to make concessions to show they were working in good faith and didn't simply end those initiatives as soon as deadlines were not met or a Republican splinter group broke the accords.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 15:08
|
|
|
MrNemo posted:The PIRA had fully disarmed by August 2001 so I'm not clear how a massive terrorist attack in the US a month later was a big factor? It wasn't. hakimashou is right that someone said it in UKMT, & everyone then pointed out why that was wrong so they backtracked to say they meant that was why they didn't re-arm.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 15:11
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:I'm sure Muhammad Atta liked to think he was some kind of freedom fighter too. Again, your own reasoning means that the Palestinians militants should also continue to fight Israel based on israel's continued and decades long use of war crimes and terror against the Palestinians. "You don't reward war crimes, you make it worse for people who resort to it. Like if it's bad, and they do war crimes, you don't make it better you make it even worse. When they give up, disarm, and renounce war crimes, then they get a seat at the table. Incentivizing bad behavior encourages it." Therefore the Palestinian militants should continue to fight Israel until they stop. Well done for encouraging an endless cycle of violence! All your arguments so far seem to be "This is wrong! (but not when Israel does it)". Can you put forward a position which isn't based on racist distinctions?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 16:44
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:There is nothing the Jewish people won't do to protect themselves after what they were put through by the Europeans. Do you want to walk this back, or is your position explicitly "The Holocaust justifies anything Israel does, even another genocide if they decide they need to."?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 19:27
|
|
|
Harik posted:Do you want to walk this back, or is your position explicitly "The Holocaust justifies anything Israel does, even another genocide if they decide they need to."? I'm honestly surprised he hasn't vindicated the holocaust yet. Dude loves his genocide apology.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 19:29
|
|
|
Harik posted:Do you want to walk this back, or is your position explicitly "The Holocaust justifies anything Israel does, even another genocide if they decide they need to."? I doubt he will admit it but from what he's written it certainly seems like it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 19:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 16:34 |
|
|
Miftan posted:I'm honestly surprised he hasn't vindicated the holocaust yet. Dude loves his genocide apology. I think ascribing "hitler did nothing wrong" to him is out-of-line. There's clearly acceptable and unacceptable ethnic cleansings for him, I just want to be clear on which are and aren't.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 19:38
|
|