Israel/Palestine thread
Think this merits its own thread...
Discuss my fellow 2+2ers..
AM YISRAEL CHAI.
[QUOTE=Crossnerd]Edit: RULES FOR THIS THREAD
Posting guidelines for Politics and Soci...
These are our baselines. We're not reinventing the wheel here. If you aren't sure if something is acceptable to post, its better to ask first. If you think someone is posting something that violates the above guidelines, please report it or PM me rather than responding in kind.
To reiterate some of the points:
1. No personal attacks. This is a broad instruction, but, in general, we want to focus on attacking an argument rather than the poster making it. It is fine to say a post is antisemitic; it is not okay to call someone an antisemite over and over. If you believe someone is making antisemitic posts, report them or PM me. The same goes for calling people "baby killers" and "genocide lovers". You are allowed to argue that an action supports genocide or that the consequences of certain policies results in the death of children, but we are no longer going to be speaking to one another's intentions. It is not productive to the conversation and doesn't further any debate.
2. Racist posts and other bigoted statements that target a particular group or individuals of such groups with derogatory comments are not allowed. This should not need further explanation.
3. Graphic Images need to be in spoilers with a trigger warning.
4. Wishing Harm on other posters will result in an immediate timeout.
5. Genocidal statements such as "Kill 'em all" etc, are no longer permissible in the thread.
If anyone has any questions about the above, please PM me. I don't want a discussion about the rules to derail the content of this thread. If anything needs clarifying, I will do that in this thread.
Please be aware this thread is strictly moderated[/quote]
One of the principle issues since the second Intifada is Hamas has never offered to sit at the table and sue for peace on the matter of Israel and Gaza. There was never a counter offer on Camp David. There was never a negotiation once Israel left Gaza in 2005. The immediate aftermath of the withdrawal from Gaza in 2005 was 140 suicide bombs in 3 years.
And this was during a Left-ruling period in Israel where frankly peace was right there if
I wonder why the heads of a group don’t travel to a predetermined position while they are constantly being targeted for assassination
I wonder why the heads of a group don’t travel to a predetermined position while they are constantly being targeted for assassination
There were soooooo many points before that, and so many proxies to be used in those negotiations (just like the hostage negotiations today).
Negotiations require good faith actors. The Palestinian side has never had them. Even in the hostage release negotiations, the terms of every negotiation were violated. The cease fires were violated too.
You are allowed to be pro-Gazan and realize Hamas is a total circus. Just as I'm pro-Israel and realize Bibi is. There is more balance to these discussions if you're prepared to actually look at what's happening.
Populations don’t have to decline in order for a genocide to have occurred. Are you aware of that?
I'm aware that you are using a ridiculous definition of genocide.
If they were trying to kill as many Palestinians as possible, they could be killing even more than they are right now, and they could have been doing it constantly for the last 20 years.
And do you just ignore that the leadership of Palestine has genocide as a stated goal of their organization?
And that their supporters in the west explicitly support that goal?
What do you think "from the river to the sea" means? Just a recommendation for a nice day's walk?
So if Israel is operating in bad faith you agree that the negotiations are a farce
I'm aware that you are using a ridiculous definition of genocide.
If they were trying to kill as many Palestinians as possible, they could be killing even more than they are right now, and they could have been doing it constantly for the last 20 years.
And do you just ignore that the leadership of Palestine has genocide as a stated goal of their organization?
And that their supporters in the west explicitly support that goal?
What do you think
None of these things have to do with disproving Israeli genocide against Palestinians.
You don’t even understand what genocide is, clearly.
None of these things have to do with disproving Israeli genocide against Palestinians.
You don’t even understand what genocide is, clearly.
We have discussed this before. I use a reasonable definition. Under your definition the Palestinians are also guilty of genocide, but they're even worse at it.
You don't understand that when someone pledges genocide against you, you're going to put up a fight against them?
And all this coming from someone who seems to live his life hoping to someday be able to kill someone in self-defense.
Trolly, the population of Gaza has doubled in 30 years. The genocide has gone very poorly by all metrics if you believe there is one.
I've been pretty careful to describe this as "ethnic cleansing" instead of "genocide," so try again. Also, if the population of Jews in Poland reaches pre-1930s levels, does that mean the Holocaust wasn't a genocide?
If I had to guess they were executing a 50 year plan to create a response so big nobody would try that again on them (and Sinwar's promises to haven't helped matters).
This is exactly what happened. Hamas is by far the least threatening of Israel's major worries. In the event of an attack by one of the larger threats in the area Israel would have responded in a way to discourage anyone else from joining in or attempting such an attack again. This means a lot of destructive power. Precision would not be the goal in such a show of force. An unguided bomb costs something like 5k USD. A precision bomb like a Jdam is closer to 30k. You can guess which one Israel was stocking up on for that scenario.
Since this began USA has been trying to send Israel the precision guided bombs to reduce civilian casualties, and also pressure them to keep casualties down in other ways. As bad as this situation is, it could be far worse. (I think there is an argument to be made that if Israel was not properly armed for this type of a mission then they should not have begun it however.)
There's a naive notion both here and in Ukraine that if USA just stopped giving aid then the conflicts would stop. No, they would be far more deadly and have far more indiscrimate killings.
I've been pretty careful to describe this as "ethnic cleansing" instead of "genocide," so try again. Also, if the population of Jews in Poland reaches pre-1930s levels, does that mean the Holocaust wasn't a genocide?
That would mean that there it isn't currently a genocide happening.
Well yes, that's how the war started. But many Israeli leaders also think it is an opportunity to ethnically cleanse the territory. We shall see if they succeed.
What do you think "from the river to the sea" means? Just a recommendation for a nice day's walk?
That's also a Likud saying. What do you suppose they mean by that?
Saudi Arabia interested in Israel normalisation deal after war
You are confusing eradication and genocide.
You don’t know what genocide means.
You are not morally able to have constructive conversations because of your mental roadblocks.
I haven't heard them saying it, so I can't be certain but it likely means they want to continue to control all of the Palestine area, with Israeli citizens of all ethnicities continue to have full rights, and not be killed.
I now see the graphic you posted, which confirms my guess, thanks!
You are confusing eradication and genocide.
You don’t know what genocide means.
You are not morally able to have constructive conversations because of your mental roadblocks.
Below is the first definition that comes up on Google. How does yours differ?
I would say that Israel is not trying to destroy the Palestinians, based partially on the fact that 20% of their citizens are Palestinians with full rights.
Dictionary
Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more
gen·o·cide
noun
the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group.
"a campaign of genocide"
Palestinians Israeli citizens do not have full rights
We have discussed this before. I use a reasonable definition. Under your definition the Palestinians are also guilty of genocide, but they're even worse at it.
You don't understand that when someone pledges genocide against you, you're going to put up a fight against them?
And all this coming from someone who seems to live his life hoping to someday be able to kill someone in self-defense.
Below is the first definition that comes up on Google. How does yours differ?
I would say that Israel is not trying to destroy the Palestinians, based partially on the fact that 20% of their citizens are Palestinians with full rights.
Dictionary
Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more
gen·o·cide
noun
the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or grou
Like I said, you’re best ignored because you’re not morally able to converse due to your mental issues. They are many many many instances of Israeli politicians and senior military leaders saying they need to kill all Palestinians and that they are subhuman.
Also I want to teach you something. 20% of their citizens having full rights only means that 20% of their citizens have full rights. It does not mean they are not trying to kill the Palestinians.
If you wanted to show evidence of Israel not wanting to kill Palestinians you could post instances where Israel acts with an abundance of caution towards Palestinian life and then you could strengthen it by showing a overt concern for Palestinian life during the war.
What you’re doing is making up causation and then saying that’s the reason why they did something.
Like I said, you’re best ignored because you’re not morally able to converse due to your mental issues. They are many many many instances of Israeli politicians and senior military leaders saying they need to kill all Palestinians and that they are subhuman.
Also I want to teach you something. 20% of their citizens having full rights only means that 20% of their citizens have full rights. It does not mean they are not trying to kill the Pal
You want to teach me something, when you don't even understand what the 20% was referring to?
And now you abandon your argument about the meaning of genocide. It's clear to me that according to the definition I gave, Hamas is guilty of genocide, while the government of Israel is not.
Well, I certainly don't support the actions of that quasi-governmental organization, and I believe the government shouldn't allow that rule.
That said, 20% of the citizenry being denied access to 13% of the land doesn't sound like the worst discrimination in the world, and definitely not as bad as what the surrounding Arab nations did by expelling their Jewish citizens.
There's a naive notion both here and in Ukraine that if USA just stopped giving aid then the conflicts would stop. No, they would be far more deadly and have far more indiscrimate killings.
Yes, this much is certain. I've not seen an intelligent historian argue the other side of this yet.
I've been pretty careful to describe this as "ethnic cleansing" instead of "genocide," so try again. Also, if the population of Jews in Poland reaches pre-1930s levels, does that mean the Holocaust wasn't a genocide?
The thing is, even ethnic cleansing doesn't pass here. We're talking about Muslims. There's no ethnic cleansing of Muslims in Israel.
There is a security concern with Gazans, however.
I know you don’t understand this but the right to vote is not the same as having full rights.
Why did you write about voting rights instead of answering the question about full rights?
