I/P: post-semitism in the desert of the deal

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > I/P: post-semitism in the desert of the deal

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

Lustful Man Hugs posted:

Can we keep the general I/P arguments to a minimum? I don't want the thread to shut down before anything really happens.

Same. The last thread was at its "best" when it was literally just liveposting/a livestream (of horror). Turns out a lot of arguments tend to evaporate when everyone is just sitting there watching a livestream of Gaza in horror, waiting for the next round of death to come.
:smith:

Atrocious Joe posted:

Arguing about Hamas seems dumb when the recent attacks have been carried out by individuals. I guess the synagogue attack may be connected to the PFLP but I'm not totally convinced.

Israeli leadership can't just bomb Arab cities in Israel and claim victory now. I'm afraid that this is going to get much uglier before it gets better.

Ah, there's that sense of crushing sadness I only really get when reading I/P. :smith:

# ¿ Nov 19, 2014 00:42

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 16, 2024 12:51

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

Lady Morgaga posted:

World is showing disapproval for their actions for decades.

This latest round might be a little more interesting since Israel-US relations are still a little strained from last time. Obama and Bibi hate each other, and the longer Israel expects America to cover for it, the more strained this relationship gets.

Really, as soon as the US stops unconditionally supporting Israel, that's pretty much it for Israel being able to do whatever the hell the want. (It's probably still going to take far too long for this to happen.)

# ¿ Nov 19, 2014 01:24

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

Xandu posted:

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/11/19/world/middleeast/killings-in-jerusalem-synagogue-complex.html?referrer=&_r=0

I realize this would put me on the super fringe in Israel (since most Jews think it'd be profane to pray at the site), but as a not particularly religious Jew, I sort of feel like if someone wants to pray there, they should let them, regardless of their religion.

Agreed. I realize how much history and hatred there is, but I still can't wrap my head around the idea that sects/religions of all stripes can't just go pray at [x] place peacefully. There are so many religious places located in Israel/Palestine that are super loving important to basically every sect of Christianity/Judaism/Islam that sharing them is basically required (and when they're not shared, people get justifiably pissed when they're told they can't pray at a site they consider really important to them.)

Related, let me just say this flat out so there's no word-twisting: Killing 4 5 people while they're praying is loving grotesque. It's horrible when Palestinians do it, it's horrible when Israelis do it, it's horrible when some white supremacist assholes in Alabama do it, it's horrible when some stupid motherfucker does it in a Kansas Church, it's horrible period.

Regardless of how much the Palestinian anger is justified, going into a synagogue and knifing/shooting a bunch of people praying is completely horrible and unacceptable. I legit had to turn off Al-Jazeera when they were showing the inside of the synagogue and the blood-stained books. :smith:

SedanChair posted:

Apparently crowds are gathering in Jerusalem calling for war. It doesn't even take guns or a car to start a war any more, I guess you can do it with an axe and a knife. Soon enough Israel will be declaring little wars for slipping on a banana peel. *slide whistle noise*

Oh, loving hell. Here we go again. :suicide:

fade5 fucked around with this message at 02:50 on Nov 19, 2014

# ¿ Nov 19, 2014 02:45

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

Jagchosis posted:

By the way if anyone wants an actually good OP, PM me materials that would be relevant for it, like a primer on the history of the conflict or relevant international humanitarian law provisions or whatever else that is a useful lens for understanding the current unrest so there can be a happy, informed debate. I will not put the Netanyahu cartoon bomb image since that presentation was done in reference to Iran, not Palestine. namaste

Darkcrawler's posts on I/P in either the last thread or a thread or two before that. I'm legit serious, he did an excellent job of explaining I/P in simple enough terms for me to follow along, and it's where a lot of my I/P knowledge came from.

For useful content, they say a picture's worth a thousand words, so here's something that really, really resonates with me:

West Bank access restrictions, or "Why a two state solution is no longer possible".

I want everyone to take a look at that map for minute and just look at just how loving sliced up and restricted the West Bank is. Seriously, look at that loving map, everything is sliced up to poo poo with walls, checkpoints, barriers, roadblocks, and non-Palestinian roads everywhere, and it's only getting worse. The Dead Sea in particular is completely cut off from Palestinian access by Israeli settlements, checkpoints, and a non-Palestinian road.

This is why a one-state solution is the only possible solution left; there's just not enough of the West Bank left to make a Palestinian state.

_{_{Fun questions: What exactly makes a vehicle a "Palestinian vehicle" vs an "Israeli vehicle" vs a "vehicle", and describe the reasoning behind "Prohibited Palestinian vehicle use" or even a hypothetical "Prohibited Israeli vehicle use" in a way that doesn't lump all Palestinians or Israelis together as one single, uniform ethnic mass.}}

fade5 fucked around with this message at 04:18 on Nov 19, 2014

# ¿ Nov 19, 2014 04:08

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

CommieGIR posted:

If I recall correctly, the Palestinian's are required to have green license plates and have to have the letter P, and the Israeli's Yellow and a blue IL or Israeli flag.

DarkCrawler posted:

License plates.

I also made these for anyone wanting specifics on why Israel is an colonialist apartheid state:
http://m.imgur.com/gallery/L86hXg4
http://m.imgur.com/gallery/Tv0cv

Doesn't that technically mean that Israel recognizes Palestine, if they recognizes Palestinian license plates? :v:

I wish I could actually laugh about that. :smith:

Oh, you can't forget the movie Defamation for the OP, aka "here's why the United States backs Israel to the hilt". Also notable for pointing out the (purposeful) correlation of anti-Semitic to mean anti-Israeli so as to squash legitimate criticism of Israel.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9E2TpxY7xM

(Sidenote: The anti-Israel=anti-Semitic thing is also bad because it cheapens real anti-semitism. As an example, the Simon Wiesenthal Center ranked cartoonist Carlos Latuff higher on an anti-semitism list than the Hungarian Jobbik party. Jobbik are basically literal loving neo-nazis.)

fade5 fucked around with this message at 04:44 on Nov 19, 2014

# ¿ Nov 19, 2014 04:41

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

Relevant crosspost from the Political Cartoons thread:

Fried Chicken posted:

The homes of the perpetrators (where their families still live) were seized and are slated for demolition and resettlement in response, btw

So the Palestinian dude who rammed his car into Israeli pedestrians? Israel literally just demolished his loving house, leaving his family with nowhere to live.

Choice quotes (just go read the whole article):

quote:

But on November 6, following two deadly Palestinian attacks in a fortnight, Netanyahu approved plans to knock down or seal up the homes of anyone attacking Israelis as part of a raft of measures to "restore calm" in Jerusalem.
--
B'Tselem says that between October 2001 and January 2005, 664 homes were destroyed across the occupied Palestinian territories, leaving 4,182 people homeless before the defence ministry decided to end the policy following research showing it was not an efficient deterrent and could encourage more violence.

So Netanyahu's officially bringing back Corruption of Blood in Israel, and there are already multiple targets. Now, Corruption of Blood has been against the law in America for quite a long time: namely, since the founding of our goddamn country.

Article One, Section Nine of the United States Constitution posted:

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

You can probably figure out which Palestinian families are going to have their houses destroyed (note that the person who actually committed the crime is already dead in all cases):

quote:

Three other families in east Jerusalem have now been formally notified that their homes are slated for demolition.

One is the home of Mohammed Jaabis, 23, from Jabel Mukaber who rammed an earthmover into a bus on August 4, killing an Israeli and wounding five. He was shot dead by police at the scene. Another is that of Muataz Hijazi, 32, from Abu Tor who on October 29 tried to gun down a far-right Jewish activist, critically wounding him. Hijazi was shot dead the following morning during a police raid. The third is the home of Ibrahim Akari, 38, from Shuafat refugee camp who on November 5 rammed his car into pedestrians, killing a teenager and a policeman and wounding nine, before also being shot dead at the scene.

Israel has likewise pledged to raze the homes of Uday and Ghassan Abu Jamal from Jabal Mukaber who on Tuesday were shot dead after attacking a synagogue with meat cleavers and a gun, killing four rabbis at prayer and a policeman.

Seriously, gently caress THE ISRAELI RIGHT SO GODDAMN MUCH. Netanyahu knows this is gonna start another loving war/intifada, and not only does he not care, he's purposefully dumping a huge can of fuel onto the fire. :tizzy:

fade5 fucked around with this message at 21:07 on Nov 19, 2014

# ¿ Nov 19, 2014 20:59

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

quote:

But on November 6, following two deadly Palestinian attacks in a fortnight, Netanyahu approved plans to knock down or seal up the homes of anyone attacking Israelis as part of a raft of measures to "restore calm" in Jerusalem.
--
B'Tselem says that between October 2001 and January 2005, 664 homes were destroyed across the occupied Palestinian territories, leaving 4,182 people homeless before the defence ministry decided to end the policy following research showing it was not an efficient deterrent and could encourage more violence.

So Netanyahu's officially bringing back punitive demolitions in Israel, and there are already multiple targets:

quote:

Three other families in east Jerusalem have now been formally notified that their homes are slated for demolition.

One is the home of Mohammed Jaabis, 23, from Jabel Mukaber who rammed an earthmover into a bus on August 4, killing an Israeli and wounding five. He was shot dead by police at the scene. Another is that of Muataz Hijazi, 32, from Abu Tor who on October 29 tried to gun down a far-right Jewish activist, critically wounding him. Hijazi was shot dead the following morning during a police raid. The third is the home of Ibrahim Akari, 38, from Shuafat refugee camp who on November 5 rammed his car into pedestrians, killing a teenager and a policeman and wounding nine, before also being shot dead at the scene.

Israel has likewise pledged to raze the homes of Uday and Ghassan Abu Jamal from Jabal Mukaber who on Tuesday were shot dead after attacking a synagogue with meat cleavers and a gun, killing four rabbis at prayer and a policeman.

Now, punishment of family members for ~~sins of the father~~ crimes committed by other family members has a specific law name: Attainder, or the much more metal-sounding "Corruption of Blood". Now, Corruption of Blood has been against the law in America for quite a long time: namely, since the founding of our goddamn country.

Article One, Section Nine of the United States Constitution posted:

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

If you want to know why Israel's the bad guy in this, here you go: Israel's the bad guy because they literally have "Corruption of Blood" as an official policy that they currently use.

_{_{This is a partial re-post from earlier, since it's important and may have gotten lost in the shuffle.}}

fade5 fucked around with this message at 20:53 on Nov 20, 2014

# ¿ Nov 20, 2014 20:48

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

Darth Walrus posted:

Jewish-only roads?

emanresu tnuocca posted:

"Israeli"-only.

I posted it before, and it's in the OP, but a reminder is always useful (because holy poo poo just look at that loving map). All the roads that have blue borders are Israeli only. This includes a road from Jericho to Jordan, and a somewhat sizable chunk of a road along the Dead Sea (which notably has absolutely no Palestinian access currently).

# ¿ Nov 27, 2014 19:50

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

starkebn posted:

How does Gaza or the West Bank differ from the Warsaw (or other) ghetto at this point. Would it help or hinder Palestinians to start using that language or comparisons?

They already are, actually. This picture is from back in late May, when Pope Francis visited the West Bank/Palestine:

quote:

The official welcome by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas of Pope Francis paled in importance to what would happen next as the pope traveled through the streets of Bethlehem and drove by the Aida refugee camp, which is adjacent to the 10-meter (33-foot) wall that Israel has erected, encircling Rachel�s Tomb deep inside Palestinian areas. For days before the visit, Palestinian youth and Israeli soldiers have been in constant battle. Two days prior to the visit, Israeli troops entered the Palestinian area and whitewashed the entire wall to prevent the pope from seeing the graffiti that has been filling it up. The night before the arrival of the pope, however, youth spray-painted new slogans, this time in English with the hope that as he drove by, the pope would learn about the aspirations of Palestinians to live in freedom.

Pope Francis not only read the graffiti, but ordered his driver to stop and, in an unplanned move, walked up to the wall, touched it and laid his head on it for a moment of prayer. The image of Pope Francis� head on the wall soon went viral on social media and no doubt adorned front pages of newspapers around the world. Some social media sites compared this image to that of Pope John Paul II's prayer at the Jewish Western Wall in Jerusalem.

In relatedly cool news, Pope Francis didn't have to go through any Israeli checkpoints in his visit:

quote:

Jordan was instrumental in helping the pontiff avoid entering Palestine through the controversial Israeli-controlled Jordan River bridge. Taking advantage of the peace treaty with Israel, Jordanians facilitated the wish of the Vatican for the pope and his entourage not to cross any Israeli military checkpoints, by providing military helicopters for transportation to Bethlehem.

Francis thumbed his nose at Israel and flew everywhere directly in Jordanian-provided helicopters, which he can do because he's the goddamn Pope. :allears:

fade5 fucked around with this message at 01:10 on Nov 28, 2014

# ¿ Nov 28, 2014 01:07

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

Baudolino posted:

Discussing who is the most to blame is really not very interesting. Instead I would like to see a discussion of the worst case scenario : Neither the one-state or the two-state solution occurs and Israel Is able to retain domination over all the occupied territories indefinitely despite facing permanent revolt and international sanctions.

In this situation organizing a massive relocation of Palestinians to neighbouring countries and elsewhere migth be the humane options. Of course this means allowing ethnic cleansing and would in effect constitute a total Israeli victory which would be a real shame, but at some point one has to realistic about what can be achieved. It seems like a good idea for the international community to draw up some plans for this possible endgame to the I/P conflict. Especially since this is the most likely outcome given the way that events have developed.
-[snip]-

More likely worst-case scenario is what ended up happening in the US: Israel takes all the rest of good land, solidifies their hold so as to be impossible to remove, and then the places with the shittiest land and/or the stubbornest Palestinians are turned into ~~Indian~~ Palestinian reservations. Israel obtains (continues having) de-facto control over the Palestinians, and the Palestinians eventually obtain semi-autonomous control over their own cities, mostly because Israel doesn't want to actually deal with them.

Eventually the Palestinian citizenship act will be passed, 50 years later the Palestinian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act will be passed, and eventually you will be able to travel from settled Israeli land to semi-autonomously governed Palestinian land without a checkpoint.

The Palestinians will have been beaten into submission, and will care more about scraping out a meager existence than continuing to fight with Israel.

And all this only a century or two after the US did it:

Don't do what we did Israel. It was horrible then (and now) too. :smith:

fade5 fucked around with this message at 01:31 on Nov 29, 2014

# ¿ Nov 29, 2014 01:26

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

Xander77 posted:

?
Hadash was always "counted" as an Arab party.

emanresu tnuocca posted:

You're probably right, can't say I have any memory of previous election polls. Short of that one election poll back in... 1996? where all of us Noar Avoda kiddies where celebrating Peres's reelection when we went to sleep and woke up to Bibi being the PM.

Maybe vote for Hadash this time? I'm thinking maybe Balad cause tbqh I admire Hanin Zouabi, she's cut of the stuff politicians should be cut off but are almost never are. I usually just don't vote at all, last time I did Meretz, who disappointed me during protective edge by keeping to themselves until it was all over. I just don't know.

And Darth Walrus, I'll write a bit about Lapid in a few.

Hadash's Wikipedia article posted:

The party supports evacuation of all Israeli settlements, a complete withdrawal by Israel from all territories occupied as a result of the Six-Day War, and the establishment of a Palestinian state in those territories. It also supports the right of return or compensation for Palestinian refugees. In addition to issues of peace and security, Hadash is also known for being active on social and environmental issues.

Hadash defines itself as a non-Zionist party, originally in keeping with Marxist opposition to nationalism. It calls for recognition of Palestinian Arabs as a national minority within Israel.

Gee, I can't see why Hadash would be considered an Arab party by a large chunk of Israel, all they want is equality for Palestinians. :v:

Also go vote drat you. Seriously please go vote, we need a couple million Israels like you in order to start unfucking the country. (Or at least try to keep the slaughters to a minimum until the US eventually stops unconditionally supporting Israel, and we can have an actual peace process.) Related, can you please do a general rundown on all of Israel's various political parties? (Even just a couple sentences with personal insights would be useful.) I know very little about them besides the fact that Bibi is part of Likud, which gives me a general idea of what Likud believes.

fade5 fucked around with this message at 23:42 on Dec 2, 2014

# ¿ Dec 2, 2014 23:38

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

Brainbread posted:

So, apparently the US government may have been talking about sanctions against Israel for continuing to build settlements in Jerusalem.

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/reports-obama-mulling-sanctions-on-israel/
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/12/05/obama-officials-mum-on-reports-white-house-weighing-sanctions-on-israel/

And I am aware that its from Fox News and Free Beacon.

It's starting to happen! :dance:

Do it Obama. Do it you crazy motherfucker. Tell Bibi to sit and loving spin, he most certainly deserves it.

Seriously, the US doesn't even have to go anti-Israel at all, we just have to stop unconditionally supporting them and then let the rest of the world sanction the poo poo out of them.

fade5 fucked around with this message at 05:29 on Dec 6, 2014

# ¿ Dec 6, 2014 05:23

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

Genpei Turtle posted:

Also it's worth noting that the secrets he sold were apparently really, really serious. His guilty plea was part of a deal with the prosecution--he would cooperate with the feds as they did a damage assessment of the information he leaked, and wouldn't talk about his case and they wouldn't ask for a life sentence. And then he broke the second part of plea deal by talking to reporters. Repeatedly. The prosecution went with the agreement anyway and didn't ask for a life sentence, but after taking one look at the damage assessment the sentencing judge went "gently caress no, into the hole you go permanently." So whatever it was that he sold, it was probably pretty bad.

Yep, and despite all this, Israel has routinely requested the release of Pollard from various US presidents and other officials. Here's the gigantic loving list of requests for Pollard's release from Pollard's Wikipedia article:

Wikipedia posted:

Yitzhak Rabin was the first Israeli prime minister to ask for the release of Pollard, requesting U.S. President Bill Clinton to pardon him in 1995. Among the many requests for Pollard's release was one at the 1998 Wye River conference, where Netanyahu recalls, "if we signed an agreement with Arafat, I expected a pardon for Pollard." Of his meeting with Netanyahu during the Wye River talks, Bill Clinton writes, "Netanyahu was threatening to scuttle the whole deal unless I released Pollard. He said I had promised him I would do so at an earlier meeting the night before, and that's why he had agreed on the other issues. In fact, I had told the prime minister that if that's what it took to make peace, I was inclined to do it, but I would have to check with our people." Clinton states that Madeleine Albright, Sandy Berger, and George Tenet were all "adamantly opposed" to letting Pollard out of prison.

Another Israeli request for Pollard's release was made in New York on September 14, 2005, and was declined by President George W. Bush. A request on Pollard's behalf that he be designated a Prisoner of Zion was rejected by the High Court of Justice of Israel on January 16, 2006. Another appeal for intervention on Pollard's behalf was rejected by the High Court on March 20, 2006.

On January 10, 2008, the subject of Pollard's pardon was again brought up for discussion, this time by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, during President George W. Bush's first visit to Israel as President. Subsequently, this request was turned down by President Bush. The next day, at a dinner attended by several ministers in the Israeli government (in addition to U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice), the subject of Pollard's release was again discussed. This time however, Prime Minister Olmert commented that it was not the appropriate occasion to discuss the fate of the convicted Israeli spy.

As President Bush was about to leave office in 2009, Pollard himself requested clemency for the first time. In an interview in Newsweek former CIA director James Woolsey endorsed Pollard's release on two conditions: that he show contrition and decline any profits from books or other projects linked to the case. Bush did not pardon him.

The New York Times reported on September 21, 2010, that the Israeli government (again under Netanyahu) informally proposed that Pollard be released as a reward to Israel for extending by three months a halt to new settlements in occupied territories.

On December 21, 2010, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he would formally and publicly call for Pollard's release. This was the first formal request made by Israel. On January 4, 2011, Netanyahu formally submitted a letter to President Obama requesting clemency. The White House issued a statement saying the letter would be reviewed, however no official response has been given to date.

In 2012, President Shimon Peres presented a letter signed by 80 Israel legislators and addressed to President Obama requesting Pollard's release on behalf of the citizens of Israel. In November 2013, Jewish Agency chairman Natan Sharansky said, "It is unprecedented in the history of the U.S. that someone who spied for a friendly country served even half the time [that Pollard has] in prison."

In late March, 2014, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry reportedly offered to release Pollard as an incentive to Israel to resume negotiations with the Palestinians toward the formation of a Palestinian state. The White House, however, announced that no decision had been made on any agreement involving Pollard.

In October, 2014, Elyakim Rubinstein, an Israeli Supreme Court Justice, former attorney general, and the acting Israeli ambassador to the US at the time of Pollard's arrest, called for Pollard's pardon. He said "Mistakes were made, mainly by the Israelis, but by the Americans as well, and 29 years [is] enough."

In November 2014, American officials sent a letter to President Obama slamming the "unjust denial of parole" for Pollard whose "grossly disproportionate sentence continues," calling the charge the government uses to keep him imprisoned "patently false." The signatories of the letter included former CIA director James Woolsey, former Assistant U.S. Defense Secretary Lawrence Korb and former U.S. National Security Advisor Robert McFarlane.

Of particular note is the offer back in late March/early April: the US was willing to offer Pollard up as part of a prisoner exchange/peace plan/way to get Israel to come to the table, but Israel refused, which shows that as much as they complain about Pollard's imprisonment, Pollard's really just a bargaining chip for Israel to hit the US with (because how dare we imprison him in the first place). Pollard's also technically eligible for parole in November 2015, but it's rather unlikely parole will be granted, and it's even questionable how much longer Pollard will live; dude's not in the greatest health.

Israel's refusal to negotiate also resulted in the greatest Yaakov Kirschen cartoon ever:

This, of course is exactly the opposite of what happened in reality. :allears:

fade5 fucked around with this message at 01:43 on Dec 9, 2014

# ¿ Dec 9, 2014 01:38

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

emanresu tnuocca posted:

Reminder that Tzipi "I demanded real Hooliganism during Cast Lead" Livni is a bloodthirsty warmonger and that anyone who has any hopes for any positive changes following the possible election of a center-left government is reading the map wrong.

And this is all without taking into account the fact that tensions are running high and the region is incredibly volatile, which could play right into Bibi's hands in case poo poo does hit the fan.

Any chance you could do a super basic rundown on the various Israeli government parties and their beliefs? I know Bibi's basically the leader of Likud, which tells me more than enough about Likud, but I'm not familiar with most of the rest of the parties, and the "left-right" divide isn't really that clear cut in Israel for multiple reasons. Plus there's all the Jewish-specific stuff that I have no loving clue about even after some research.

Darth Walrus posted:

A Reuters reporter saw Abu Ein's death. Looks like it was a neck chop, not a rifle blow, that killed him.

Holy poo poo, this ain't gonna end well. I don't even want to contemplate how Prime Minister Bennett might add to the situation.

Oh loving Christ this is gonna be bad. The situation is already inflamed, this is gonna (justifiably) piss off the Palestinians even moreso than usual. It also means that someone has to take his place, and succession sucks at the best of times. And Israel's in the midst of getting a new government which makes things even more unstable.

gently caress.

fade5 fucked around with this message at 19:43 on Dec 10, 2014

# ¿ Dec 10, 2014 19:41

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

emanresu tnuocca posted:

I'll try to do a write up during the weekend, but it's going to be personally biased like all hell.

You seem to be implying that this is a problem.

You're the perfect person to do a write up because you know a lot of the specifics and backgrounds of the parties, but you're also a Jewish Israeli who sees the Palestinians as human and deserving of humane treatment and equality. You're (unfortunately) somewhat of a rarity both online and in real life, and I want to get some background on Israeli politics that isn't slathered in pro-Israeli rhetoric.

"Personally biased" isn't a problem; that's half the reason I want you to do the write up, specifically because you're personally biased. :v:

fade5 fucked around with this message at 20:45 on Dec 11, 2014

# ¿ Dec 11, 2014 18:56

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

Brainbread posted:

Which to me seemed like a fairly succinct explanation of the situation. That was from September, 2013 though. And as far as I can tell, I agree with it. Gaza is unlikely to ever want to be part of Israel (and its not like Israel settlers are moving there, so I guess they don't want it either), and the West Bank is slowly being taken over as is.

I guess eventually Israel will completely absorb the West Bank and Gaza will remain an open-air prison even after that?

Sooner or later the Gaza strip and parts of the West Bank will probably be turned into Palestinian reservations, with the Palestinians eventually given semi-autonomous rule, albeit while still under Israeli jurisdiction.

And yes, I use the word "reservations" deliberately. Since a one-state solution is probably the only avenue left, creating reservations like the US did with Native Americas gives Israel a way to say "okay we gave the Palestinians some autonomy, get off our backs" while still keeping all the land.

fade5 fucked around with this message at 03:34 on Dec 24, 2014

# ¿ Dec 24, 2014 03:27

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

kustomkarkommando posted:

After a bit of speculation it's now confirmed that Abbas submitted a 12(3) declaration to the ICC back-dating jurisdiction to 13th June 2014 which has the specific aim of bringing Protective Edge under the scope of a possible investigation.

http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/PIDS/press/Palestine_A_12-3.pdf#search=palestine

Is that seriously what his signature looks like? It's... 3 lines attached to an oval. I realize that illegible/strange signatures are fairly common, especially among politicians who have to sign (or have secretaries sign) a bunch of stuff, but still.

# ¿ Jan 4, 2015 02:37

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

So Bibi's really going ahead with the speech, huh?

I never thought he'd actually do something so asinine that it would jeopardize Israel's hugely bipartisan support in the US, but he's doing it. Seriously, what the hell is he thinking at this point, he's got to know that he's already hosed up a good thing for Israel, and yet he's making it worse.

I mean I'm all for him continuing to be an rear end in a top hat like he is, since this might finally end the US's unconditional support for Israel, but I don't see what it get him (and Israel in general) in the medium to long term.

Absurd Alhazred posted:

All the Iranians I've met were pretty chill, the few Saudis I've met were all assholes. America should help the Houthis take over Saudi Arabia, crown the Shias as "the good Muslims" for the next 20 years.

As long as the Kurds also get to be "the good Muslims", I'm down with this plan.

# ¿ Mar 1, 2015 19:29

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

Liberal_L33t posted:

Now that we've gotten the news that Obama may have threatened outright attack of Netanyahu's bombers in response to a planned 2014 Israeli attack (obviously intended to drag the U.S. into an invasion of Iran)

Kim Jong Il posted:

Consider the source. There's no way that story is true.

You know, I'm almost wondering if this might end up backfiring on the Republicans pushing the story. The fact that the story is gaining so much traction in the right-wing crazy bubble is pretty obviously an attempt to shore up support for Bibi and Israel and paint Obama (and Iran/the Iranian negotiations) as the bad guy, but there's also the line of thought that I've already seen brought up that basically goes:

:toughguy:

"Sure, blow that motherfucker out of the sky, better that than Israel starting/dragging the US into (another) huge war that leads to hundreds of thousands of US, Israeli, and Iranian casualties (both military and civilian)."

I could see that line of thought appealing to quite a few people in America who have been recently disillusioned with Bibi thanks to the poo poo he's pulled/is pulling, and to be super loving honest I agree with that line of thought. If Israel really wants to start a hot war with Iran then you're on your own dudes, good loving luck with that poo poo.

fade5 fucked around with this message at 02:51 on Mar 2, 2015

# ¿ Mar 2, 2015 02:41

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

Avshalom posted:

I am a Jew who is on your side, i.e., anti-Israel, and this kind of poo poo is incredibly alienating to me. You're making it pretty clear that you've got some major deep-seated prejudices against me, and your response to being called out on them is to try to scream me down. Why should I listen to anything that any of you have to say? Just a hint: this reaction is not unique to me.

You're a cool dude, and I wish there were more people like you, and emanresu tnuocca, and Main Paineframe, and all of the other Jewish posters (and Jewish people in general) who are opposed to what Israel is doing to the Palestinians. I especially wish there were more Israeli ~~guys~~ ~~girls~~ people like you all who had actual say-so in Israel, because I would love for all the miserable poo poo to finally end peaceably before it ends in even more bloodshed/Palestinian reservations a la the US and Native Americans.

In actual Israel-chat: I'm torn on whether I should hope Netanyahu wins re-election or not.

On the one hand, I hate his loving guts and want his little speech to backfire badly against him. I'd also like to see Likud lose their leader. But if he doesn't win, there's a not-insignificant chance that he might be replaced by someone even worse, which would really suck. (I remember there was some potential dude mentioned who wants to flat-out annex Gaza and the West Bank, which sounds terrifying if it's anything like what happened to Gaza recently.) It also means that the rift in Israeli-US politics can start to be papered over with someone "new" as prime minister, even if the new person is just as bad/worse than Netanyahu.

If Netanyahu wins re-election then it means that he probably stays prime minister, the current lovely policies/settlements continue, and Netanyahu is vindicated in his little speech. But it also means that the rift that is now developing between Israel and the US will continue to exist and may even start to gain more traction among Democrats, which would be a huge part of finally ending the unconditional and bipartisan support for Israel in the US.

fade5 fucked around with this message at 00:38 on Mar 6, 2015

# ¿ Mar 6, 2015 00:29

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

DaveWoo posted:

I imagine they'll be pretty much exactly the same as they've been for the past six years.

Did you miss the part where 56 Democrats skipped Netanyahu's speech, and where support for Israel is no longer a completely immutable and bipartisan rule in the US? Because it's happening, and a lot sooner than anyone expected.

Oh yeah, and I just found out that my congresscritter Joaquin Castro was one of the 56 Democrats who skipped Netanyahu's speech.

loving awesome. :c00lbert:

# ¿ Mar 6, 2015 02:06

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

So this was kinda super goddamn important:

Main Paineframe posted:

Kinda interesting that the major parties are so determined to make things about Palestine and foreign affairs - and thereby avoid the much more difficult domestic issues.

http://www.jpost.com/Israel-Elections/Obama-planning-to-pressure-Israel-Likud-officials-say-Bring-it-on-393155

quote:

Amid reports that President Barack Obama plans to utilize the final 20 months of his term in office to push through a major diplomatic initiative in the Israeli-Palestinian sphere, officials in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu�s ruling Likud party on Friday privately expressed glee over the prospect.

Likud officials reacted to a report in the liberal daily Haaretz which cited White House sources as saying that Obama has every intention of revisiting the issue after a new government is formed in Jerusalem.

�We would like to see the formation of the new government in Israel and its attitude to this issue,� a US official told Haaretz. �But in the year and a half to two years that Obama has left in the White House, we will have to deal with this issue because time is working against us.�

The Haaretz report, although seemingly problematic for the Israeli Right since it implies more pressure from Washington for Israeli concessions to the Palestinians, may actually serve Netanyahu�s short-term political goals.

Likud officials told The Jerusalem Post�s Gil Hoffman that the party could exploit the specter of a US-imposed Israeli withdrawal to rally more voters to Netanyahu�s side. They believe that reminding voters about the danger of an Obama administration winding down its term in office will frighten them into casting their ballots for Netanyahu once more.

The flurry of talk and speculation regarding Obama�s plans following the Israeli elections can be felt immediately following Netanyahu�s appearance this past Tuesday before a joint session of Congress.

Earlier on Friday, a source close to Netanyahu denied a Yediot Aharonot report which claimed that the prime minister had agreed in principle to an Israeli withdrawal to the 1967 armistice lines as the basis for negotiations with the Palestinians.

This, in turn, led to alarm on within the nationalist camp. Naftali Bennett, the chairman of Bayit Yehudi, took to Facebook on Friday, posting an impassioned plea to right-wing voters to bolster his faction�s clout in the next parliament in order to head off �unprecedented international pressure.�

�Wake up,� Bennett writes. �This is a letter that I wrote from the heart. I am writing now out of a sense of urgency. We must rouse the public in order to prevent a disaster for Israel.�

�I will be as clear as possible,� he writes. �In the next two years, unprecedented pressure will be brought to bear on Israel to give up Judea and Samaria to the Arabs and to establish a Palestinian state there. Without a strong Bayit Yehudi in parliament, this disaster will happen. Nobody will be there to stop it.�

Bennett said that the document cited by Yediot Aharonot indicating Netanyahu�s acquiescence to an Israeli pullback to the �67 lines �is true, irrespective of the motives behind its publication.�

�The facts are correct,� Bennett said. �It has already been reported in other media outlets.� The two largest nationalist parties will now vie for votes by claiming that only they can stop the coming wave of pressure.

If this comes to pass, then Netanyahu will go down in history as the guy who pushed too far and finally got the US to stop unilaterally supporting Israel. I really hope Obama goes through with this, and I'm almost hoping Bibi ends up re-elected just so that Obama doesn't feel the need to pull his punches like he might with a new guy in charge.

# ¿ Mar 7, 2015 23:35

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

ComradeCosmobot posted:

Max Fischer at Vox seems to think that this isn't going to happen, as Netanyahu has all but declared the two-state solution dead to get the right-wing vote.

Well then I guess I'll eventually welcome and give my support the new singular state of Israel. You guys had the chance to do the easier two-state way, now you get to go the more difficult one-state way. Good loving luck, and try to start treating the Palestinians better than we did the Native Americans.

To be honest with how loving sliced up and settled the West Bank is, and how much of it is already under Israeli control, the two-state solution has been almost impossible for years now anyway.

Main Paineframe posted:

More or less, yeah. In the current political minefield, the Israeli Supreme Court functions as a strong force for secularism and equal rights, striking down large amounts of religious-centric or overtly racist law from the various wild right-wingers. It's not really surprising that the extreme right is getting madder and madder at the constant foilings of their attempts to enshrine Haredi practices in law and disenfranchise various minorities.

Wow, Israel even has their over version of the crazy fuckers still fighting Marbury vs Madison. It doesn't even surprise me anymore.

# ¿ Mar 10, 2015 00:03

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

Darth Walrus posted:

Hint - a Netanyahu-proposed one-state solution does not mean reaching out to Palestinians, but ethnically cleansing them even more thoroughly. We may well see a dent getting put in that enormous Palestinian population growth soon.

emanresu tnuocca posted:

Words coming out of Netanyahu's mouth don't mean anything, doubly so when spoken before the elections. Regardless if anything Netanyahu's rejection of his own 2009 statements should most naturally be interpreted as a commitment to keep the status-quo going for as long as possible.

And so when the next Israeli attack on Gaza and/or the West Bank starts, US-Israeli relations start to fray even further as more people get killed. How long the attack goes on and how hard it damages US-Israeli relations will determine when and how far the US distances itself from supporting Israel, as well as allowing non-support of Israel/support of the Palestinians to start becoming a non-suicidal political opinion in the US. (Honestly I think this has already started to happen, with so many Democrats choosing to give the middle finger to Bibi and his little speech with basically no fear of political repercussions.)

I'm under no illusions that a one-state solution will happen peacefully. There will be more poo poo like Pillar of ~~Defense~~ Cloud and Protective Edge, more settlements, more death, and the resistance to eventual "integration" in Israel be worse than it was even in the heart of the South during the Civil Rights Act, and issues will continue to fester below the surface for decades afterward, again just like the US. Palestinians will end up being basically second-class citizens in practice and possibly even in official law, again just like the US but worse.

But eventually integration will happen, and the process towards a one-state solution is starting faster than pretty much anyone thought thanks to Bibi's little speech.

I will say that a two-state solution might also happen, but I don't know if Israel has the stomach to actually tell the settlers in the West Bank to get the gently caress out, and that's (one of) the biggest sticking point(s) to a two-state solution.

If Israel finds the balls to do that, then I'll happily eat my words and look forward to the state of Israel and the state of Palestine, but I just don't see Israel being willing to give up all that land and all those resources.

fade5 fucked around with this message at 01:55 on Mar 10, 2015

# ¿ Mar 10, 2015 01:45

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

Avshalom posted:

Declaring the two-state solution dead is making GBS threads all over the vision that my beloved risked getting himself assassinated for - he only ever got to lay the groundwork, which wasn't his fault at all, but it was a massive step and left no doubt that his heart was totally in it. There is no other feasible solution but the split state. There are lots of other possible solutions, many of which would be ethically preferable, but they don't have a chance of happening.

Oh don't get me wrong, I'd love for the two-state solution to succeed, and if I saw a potentially viable path forward for the two-state solution I'd be behind it all the way.

I just don't see how it's really possible when the West Bank looks like this:

How the hell do you create a Palestinian state out of that? There's basically no Palestinian land that's contiguous in the West Bank, there's walls and checkpoints everywhere, absolutely no Palestinian access to the Dead Sea, Israeli settlements have literally cut the West Bank in half, and Israel controls basically the entire contiguous eastern 1/3 of the West Bank with the exception of Jericho.

DarkCrawler posted:

Nobody actually thinks its going to happen in the next few years. It's going to happen when the generations who don't give a poo poo about Israel get to power in the US, by which time it's going to be really hard to have two states. We'll all probably be like 60 then.

Basically, I've come around to DarkCrawler's way of seeing things. I'd love to be wrong, and the Bibi speech thing is definitely an unprecedented development in Israel-US relations, but I just don't know if it makes the two-state solution any more likely to happen at all.
:smith:

fade5 fucked around with this message at 03:05 on Mar 10, 2015

# ¿ Mar 10, 2015 03:03

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

Avshalom posted:

i don't know i don't even know what this thing is

i asked in another thread and they were like "it's gotenks????" like i'm an idiot but what the gently caress is a gotenk and how does it apply to me

It's probably from the same rich mystery person who is apparently buying new avs/gang tags for people, that's where I got my new :black101:

av as well. How the hell have you never watched DBZ, I thought everyone ever watched DBZ at one point or another.

E: Huh, looks like it's already changed. :v:

Actual news, to make this a relevant post:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/12/us-israel-election-idUSKBN0M80ZB20150312
It looks like Netanyahu's little gamble in the US may have actually backfired on him, and Netanyahu may not be prime minister very soon:

quote:

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu launched a last-minute media blitz on Thursday to counter what appears to be a rising tide of support for his main opponent in next week's election, the centrist Zionist Union.

The latest opinion polls show momentum shifting to Zionist Union after weeks of running neck-and-neck with Netanyahu's right-wing Likud, and the premier again warned voters who have abandoned his party for like-minded challengers that without their votes, he could lose.

Forecast to win up to 24 seats to Likud's 21 in the 120-member parliament, Zionist Union hopes the gap will be wide enough to persuade Israel's president to ask its leader, Labour party chief Isaac Herzog, rather than Netanyahu, to try to form a coalition government after Tuesday's balloting.

"If we don't close the gap in the coming days, there is certainly a risk that Tzipi Livni and Bougie Herzog will be the next prime ministers," Netanyahu told Channel 2 in one of two primetime television interviews, using Herzog's nickname.

I'm not sure whether this is a good thing or a bad thing, honestly. For the Israelis on the ground, did this come out of nowhere, or is this about what you expected to happen?

Also, I don't have an intrinsically negative reaction to Herzog's name like I do to Netanyahu's. Is my gut feeling of non-hatred correct/justifiable, or do I just not know enough about Herzog to start hating him yet?

fade5 fucked around with this message at 23:38 on Mar 12, 2015

# ¿ Mar 12, 2015 23:21

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

Doflamingo posted:

EDIT: Shout out to all my Meretz bros. We made it in at least!

Congrats to all of you guys/gals for voting. You did your part and tried your damnedest, have no regrets.

Do It Once Right posted:

Why? Pages back, but why?

Bibi showed all his cards in his speech to US congress in his one great omission - Israel is not willing to commit to open war with Iran. (in spite of the terrible global threat of nuclear Iran that they want to impress on the global community)

Obama gets to cruise the rest of his term. Israel ain't starting any major poo poo, and the US isn't going to proxy-war for them in Iran like they did in Iraq.
No go-nowhere dog-and-pony-show peace talks either. He can focus on other, more productive things.

For Obama, Israel is back-burnered for the remainder of his time in office. And the international community will stew for that time.

Obama hates Bibi, and now has to deal with him for the rest of 2015 and 2016 rather than having a nice, mostly clean "reset" with a Zionist Union coalition.

Also Bibi has done (even more) possibly irreparable damage to the US-Israeli relationship by explicitly saying "no 2-state solution". The US has had the "2-state solution" line as official policy for decades, even if it was mostly just lip service. Now Bibi has officially torched the idea, and the US can't really pretend he said otherwise. Bibi could do a 180 shortly, but I don't think he's going to.

Also the Iran deal is still in talks, and Bibi's victory might be the last, spiteful push needed to come to a deal with Iran. "Fine, you guys want that fucker Bibi so much? Well then enjoy our new deal with Iran that you assholes tried so loving hard to tank."

Main Paineframe posted:

Besides, honestly, I can't see the US taking much real action against Israel. We might cut back on our support for Israel, but it's not like the IDF occupation is going to lose against Hamas fighters just because we stop giving Israel a discount on fighter jets, or anything like that. And it's not like the Security Council is going to order a UN invasion of Israel if we stop vetoing, or anything silly like that.

A Winner is Jew posted:

We don't have to vote against them at the UN, we just have to not keep using our veto as a permanent security council member to cover their rear end which I think would be in the realm of possibility now.

This honestly the thing I'm really hoping will happen in the next 2 years. The US will not go anti-Israel, but I'm really, really hoping that the next time something UN-related happens the US just abstains from voting, and Israel finally gets to feel what happens when they don't have the US shielding them from the consequences of their actions.

fade5 fucked around with this message at 23:57 on Mar 17, 2015

# ¿ Mar 17, 2015 23:49

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

DaveWoo posted:

For someone who doesn't want to repeat his brother's foreign policy mistakes, he sure is using an awful lot of his brother's foreign policy advisers.

mcmagic posted:

That's just who republicans hire for foreign policy. Those were the same geniuses who ran Romney's FP shop.

... that's not really a refutation of DaveWoo's point, it just means that in the hypothetical bad universe of President Romney the US would be gearing up for an invasion of Iran right about now. Man, you think our timeline has had some bad poo poo, I don't even want to imagine that one. :ohdear:

Again, look at the guy in the middle in dark red ~~blood~~: Paul loving Wolfowitz. They guy who was literally the first person to bring up Iraq after 9/11 happened.

You have far, far more faith in Jeb Bush not starting Iraq War 3/Iran War 1 than I do, I'm working under the assumption that that invading Iraq/Syria/Iran is a given with president Jeb Bush.

E: Jeb Bush would also mean all the progress with Iran is erased, and all the "progress" with the US/Israeli relationship is reset back to what it was in 2000-2008.

fade5 fucked around with this message at 00:06 on Mar 19, 2015

# ¿ Mar 18, 2015 23:59

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

DaveWoo posted:

Obama speaks about Israel/Netanyahu:

Gotta admit, that's quite a bit harsher than I expected him to say publicly.

Holy poo poo that's basically everything I hoped he would say. Not letting Netanyahu flop back to the two-state line, not ruling out letting the UN recognize the state of Palestine, and specifically calling out Bibi's "Arabs are voting in droves" line. (Yeah, I can see why that would make Obama super pissed, change "Arab" to "Black" and you get something that's very familiar to Obama in US politics.)

Elotana posted:

Bennett to Bibi: "Hey rear end in a top hat we all speak English"

http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Po...an-state-394595

Oh this is hilarious. :allears:

Bibi's definitely stuck between a rock and a hard place now. I honestly think he might just go back to saying the two-state solution is dead since it's obvious Obama isn't letting him walk that one back. It's basically the truth and it's probably what Bibi actually believes anyway.

# ¿ Mar 22, 2015 17:18

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

Main Paineframe posted:

Now, this doesn't change Israel's overall status. However, it indicates a fundamental change in their relationship with the US, which has previously played dumb and pretended that they knew nothing about potential Israeli nuclear capabilities. It also injects quite an embarrassing element into Israel's current diplomatic efforts, as publicly exposing Israel as a nuclear state is something that can play a role in diplomatic negotiations concerning Iran's nuclear program.

Zeitgueist posted:

This is what happens when you start believing your own hype, as far as Bibi thinking he can bully the US around.

You having fun yet Bibi? How's that that "unbreakable" US-Israeli bond doing? Cause from here it's looking more and more tenuous. :getin:

Seriously, if you wanted an official "poo poo has changed forever" point, the US purposefully leaking Israel's nuclear weapons capabilities is it. There's no going back from that, and while everyone has known that Israel has had nuclear weapons for years, this makes it officially public that Israel Is A Nuclear State.

I have to congratulate Bibi; I hate his guts, but he's done more for the US-Israeli relationship than I ever thought possible.

A Winner is Jew posted:

Proceed Prime Minister

fade5 fucked around with this message at 21:25 on Mar 27, 2015

# ¿ Mar 27, 2015 21:19

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

Venom Snake posted:

Except people have been saying this all along down the line and France just put in a resolution on Palestine and the word on the street is the U.S. isn't going to veto.

Sorry, but just because you say everything will be poo poo forever, doesn't mean it's true. Israel has finally broken the thin ice it was on.

Link?

Because "US abstains on a resolution rather than vetos" is like my loving dream of what the US could do to thumb our nose at Netanyahu/Israel.

# ¿ Mar 28, 2015 21:14

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

Disinterested posted:

I don't think anyone ITT is calling for the outright abolition of the state of Israel and the removal of its citizens from the territory. Most countries are founded on stupidity and injustice, it doesn't make destroying them a good idea. Nonetheless, it's important not to make the best the enemy of the good. The native American population and societies displaced in North America was mostly obliterated by disease and genocided away. It isn't ever coming back.

There is, however, a group of people in Palestine (and also Egypt, Syria and Jordan) who were really effected by the Nakba, including a number of them who experienced it personally and who are entitled to restitution of some kind, and to a state of their own.

This isn't dry and settled history yet. It's still current affairs.

When I say "Israel" I'm usually using it as shorthand for "actions of Netanyahu and/or the right-wing/Likud government of Israel". I support Israel itself as a state, and I really wish a two state solution didn't seem as drat near impossible as it currently does.

Let's have an insane hypothetical that's insane even by this thread's hypotheticals: let's say that the recent Israeli election had gone completely off the wall and resulted in Meretz and the Joint Arab List somehow getting 40 seats each. Since this is an insane hypothetical anyway, let's say that this unprecedented development also means that Joint Arab List holds itself together and avoids infighting for the time being, and as a result a majority coalition is formed based on:

-Dismantling Israeli settlements in the West Bank
-Full equality for the Arab population in Israel
-An end to rampant discrimination against Palestinians and Arab Israelis, and an end to discrimination in general
-A real, genuine push for a peaceful Two-State Solution
-Protecting workers' rights and issues
-Massively increased social services and welfare

Then I would back that Israel/Israeli government to the hilt, and be genuinely happy to support them. (And honestly be a little jealous of Israel, given the current deadlocked status of US politics.)

Now if all of that happening would qualify to various people as "the abolition of the state of Israel" (who am I kidding, there's be non-stop screaming from the word go), well then that's a problem with how those ~~people~~ idiots are defining the "State of Israel".

fade5 fucked around with this message at 16:54 on Mar 30, 2015

# ¿ Mar 30, 2015 16:50

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

fade5 posted:

Also the Iran deal is still in talks, and Bibi's victory might be the last, spiteful push needed to come to a deal with Iran. "Fine, you guys want that fucker Bibi so much? Well then enjoy our new deal with Iran that you assholes tried so loving hard to tank."

Liberal_L33t posted:

Optimism as Iran nuclear deal framework announced

Politoons thread crossposting: I am totally picturing Bibi looking like Yaakov Kirschen's self-insert from 'Dry Bones', all angry and crosseyed staring at this headline

I have never been happier to be right. :allears:

Thanks Bibi, you did the impossible and managed to make the US start to pivot away from Israel to Iran. Nice work buddy, you deserve a medal for pulling that off. :getin:

fade5 fucked around with this message at 00:15 on Apr 3, 2015

# ¿ Apr 2, 2015 23:21

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

Dolash posted:

Is there any actual news? A friend of mine said he's seen rumblings that something regarding the two-state solution or Palestinian statehood might get floated as a test balloon at the UN soon, to see if the US might budge a little, but I haven't seen anything concrete myself.

Depends if you consider it "news" not, but Obama/the White House is trolling the gently caress out of Netanyahu about the Iran deal:

I thought this had been posted in this thread already but apparently not, so enjoy the Bibi mocking straight from the top. I wholeheartedly approve of the new "I don't give a gently caress anymore" Obama. :getin:

fade5 fucked around with this message at 23:13 on Apr 9, 2015

# ¿ Apr 9, 2015 22:58

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

Dolash posted:

Has anything actually happened in regards to Israel and Palestine lately or are we just up to our balls in stupid circular arguing with idiots?

The White house mocked Bibi:

E:
Also, Israel and the PA came to an agreement over taxes.
http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Frozen-tax-fund-agreement-reached-Israel-to-transfer-over-NIS-1-billion-to-PA-398480
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/news/middle-east/18128-israel-to-release-473mn-in-withheld-pa-tax-revenues

quote:

The Israeli government announced Sunday that it will be releasing this week $1.85 billion shekel (roughly $473 million) in withheld taxes collected on behalf of the Palestinian Authority (PA), according to Israeli radio.

"Israel decided to transfer the PA's tax revenues out of keenness to maintain political stability in the region and other humanitarian consideration," Israeli radio quoted an unnamed security source as saying.

On Saturday, Palestinian Civil Affairs Minister Hassan al-Sheikh told pressmen that Israel will be transferring Palestinian tax on Sunday or Monday at the latest.

A day earlier, Palestinian Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah said that Israel has agreed to disburse withheld Palestinian tax revenues in their entirety.

He added that the Israeli government had agreed to transfer the funds � covering four months, from December 2014 to March 2015 � to his government.

He did not say, however, how his government had reached agreement with Israel or when exactly the funds would be disbursed.

fade5 fucked around with this message at 20:59 on Apr 19, 2015

# ¿ Apr 19, 2015 20:54

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

Job Truniht posted:

Are new settlements that serious of a controversial issue within the Israeli government? I thought even the left wing Israelis were okay with it.

Lum_ posted:

Left-wing Israelis are most definitely not OK with new settlements, and all five of them agree it's a bad idea when they get together at the bar.

Hey now, Zehava Gal-On, Ilan Gilon, Issawi Frej, Michal Rozin, and Tamar Zandberg deserve every second of bar time they can get given the daily status of Israeli politics. :colbert:

Semi-seriously, the Meretz party not only opposes new settlements, but also supports paying Israeli ~~residents~~ settlers of the West Bank to leave willingly:

Meretz posted:

Any solution must be based on two states for two nations with a border based on pre-1967 lines with agreed-upon land swaps, and include an end to the conflict through a regional solution based on the Arab Peace Plan, the Meretz platform states.

The party sees UN recognition of a Palestinian state as a pathway toward negotiations and calls for the following immediate steps to be taken: Stopping settlement construction, paying Israeli residents of the West Bank to leave willingly and removing the naval blockade on the Gaza Strip in a gradual and coordinated way.

�If there is no diplomatic agreement within two years, the world will force one on Israel,� Gal-On said. �We cannot reach negotiations from a position of disadvantage, with international sanctions. That will weaken us and our ability to insist on security arrangements.� By building settlements, the government �is not only wasting our money on bizarre adventures in the territories, but it is laying thousands of explosives to blow up the idea of two states and dividing the land,� she said.

Now if only Meretz had any kind of serious pull and influence in Israeli politics. :smith:

# ¿ May 5, 2015 00:26

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

team overhead smash posted:

Hiliary has announced she is anti BDS

It isn't exactly surprising but I'd have hoped she'd at least steer clear of the issue unless pressed on it, not dive straight into it without any prompting.

While stating her commitment to a two state solution, it defends Israel as a "vibrant democracy" and points out how Hilary has defended Israel in the UN and the Humans Rights Council, condemned the Goldstone report and blocked attempts at the UN to declare Palestinian statehood. Furthermore, she promises to 'speak out' on that issue in weeks to come.

Looks like as Clinton has sensed the strained relationship between Obama and Netanyahu and is looking to cover herself and garner support.

Dangit, just when we were making a little progress.

# ¿ Jul 6, 2015 20:55

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

It's been a year since the Gaza War.

Gaza is still destroyed and in pretty much the same shape it was a day after the war ended:
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/07/gaza-war-150708062258665.html

:smithicide:

I wish there was some way to break the hardline pro-Israel (read: pro-Israel no matter how many warcrimes the Israeli government commits) stance the US has.
:smith:

# ¿ Jul 9, 2015 00:11

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

Absurd Alhazred posted:

I think it might help the discussion if someone were to cite in-thread (rather than through a link) a few examples of Israeli laws which treat Israeli Jews and Israeli Arabs differently.

DarkCrawler posted:

Only Israeli Jews and Druze are drafted.

The Law of Return is a discriminatory law that gives one native racial/religious group precedence over all others in immigration.

The Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law bars Israel's subjects from West Bank attaining citizenship, even if they have been born in Israel proper, want to marry an Israeli citizen or have relatives there.

The Jewish National Fund is a discriminatory organization ensuring that Jews will have a dispropotionate amount of ownership of the land in Israel, supported by the government. If Jewish National Fund gives land to an Arab (which it does rarely) the government has to give the exact same amount of land back to it. This has ensured that Arab ownership of Israel's land is only three percent.

Arab citizens of Israel are not permitted to start settlements on the West Bank or living in already existing settlements if the settlement council doesn't tolerate Arabs.

The Israeli government has a long-standing policy of denying state recognition to holy places that aren't Jewish.

The government spends far less the amount of money per every Jewish student then it does per every Arab Student. Human Rights Watch has found systematic discrimination in the number, quality and condition of the buildings, classroom sizes, provision of teaching resources and government funding.

Few Jews learn even basic Arabic, whereas Arab children are required to learn Hebrew to advanced level. Despite both ostensibly being official languages of the state.

University courses in Israel are in Hebrew or English.

Israel does not have a nationality - only Jews are both Israeli nationals and citizens.

A political party can be disqualified if they don't recognize Israel as a Jewish state.

State education law states loyalty to the Jewish people as one of the main goals of state education.

State Jewish religious schools can have independent curriculum, state Arab schools can�t.

This is a good post, and very depressing.

# ¿ Jul 13, 2015 03:11

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 16, 2024 12:51

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

mcmagic posted:

It's pretty nice to see how Netanyahu's insane statements and actions are really driving a wedge between the Israel and a lot of Democratic voters in the US...

We have found the one working case of accelerationism.

It sucks that it's related to that rear end in a top hat Netanyahu.

Shimrra Jamaane posted:

So Netanyahu would have been outraged by any deal that didn't involve "we begin bombing in one hour" basically right?

He'd also want a written apology from Obama for daring to say anything bad about Israel in the first place.

But yeah, to Netanyahu any US deal with Iran is a bad deal.

E: Remember Bibi's bomb drawing and the White House's trolling?

fade5 fucked around with this message at 18:28 on Jul 14, 2015

# ¿ Jul 14, 2015 18:08

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > I/P: post-semitism in the desert of the deal

«‹›2 »