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]
America's treatment of refugees in WWII is not an example the rest of the world should follow.
it's gotta be some kind of cognitive dissonance that americans think "we're obviously the good guys" and then believe are actions should be the example?.. like, no. our reaction to 9/11 was BAD. millions of innocent people were killed/displaced for no real success. that was bad and should not be used to justify anything.
yes. bombing places is bad. yes, the US nuking Japanese cities and killing civilians was bad.
but you aren't actually asking a real question. you just want to hear an excuse/justification for Israel's conduct in ethnically cleansing gaza. the population should be IN gaza they shouldn't be displaced to another country. israel shouldn't have barbarically razed empty homes, schools, and churches so that the innocent civilians aren't able to
I'm not even asking because I care for the Gaza example as the central focus. I'm asking practically speaking, what is the best thing to do when you have millions and millions of starving terrified refugees that need medical care and food. What is the most humane and effective course of action?
Lol, enough of the hamas should surrender. I don't even. They're suicide cretins.
Immediate ceasefire...
Create a buffer zone large enough to ensure an increased and adequate safety for Israelis - but nothing will eliminate all threats...
Evacuate civilians (forcefully if need be)in that buffer
zone and relocate them while supplying them with everything they need to survive and to rebuild and to be kept safe. A shitload of money needs to be spent is on that now...
Go through that buffer zone and destroy any tunnel and bunker and so forth...
Accept that living next door down to hamas is never going away.
So ideally, the refugees cross borders into places where they can be safe, fed, etc.
I don't know how this would work for countries that would see their populations increase by 30% or more from it (and let's be honest that would create a near collapse for many countries). Like 100m South Americans busting into the USA if climate change gets real bad is a hell of a concept to consider.
But this is the closest thing to an answer that I've seen in here so far. Anyone else?
This is the one thing they will no longer accept. If Hamas lived on Staten Island, the USA would never accept it either.
Living next door to radicalized genocidal terrorists with an infinitely long timeline on taking all of Israel is just off the table as of Oct 7th. That's the one thing that seems set in stone now.
I'm not even asking because I care for the Gaza example. I'm asking practically speaking, what is the best thing to do when you have millions and millions of starving terrified refugees that need medical care and food. What is the most humane and effective course of action?
direct the money and equipment that is being given and used to create those refugees towards humanitarian aid for them would be a start. use influence if you have any to stop the ongoing and further creation of refugees. bring to light the action of the countries creating said refugees.
i'm assuming you, like mets has previously done, are trying to get to the answer "egypt should accept them" and thus make you feel better about israel displacing them when egypt won't accept them. if that's not the case than i apologize for putting words in your mouth
So ideally, the refugees cross borders into places where they can be safe, fed, etc.
I don't know how this would work for countries that would see their populations increase by 30% or more from it (and let's be honest that would create a near collapse for many countries). Like 100m South Americans busting into the USA if climate change gets real bad is a hell of a concept to consider.
But this is the closest thing to an answer that I've see
Millions of Latin Americans crossing the border into the US isn't actually that difficult to imagine.
direct the money and equipment that is being given and used to create those refugees towards humanitarian aid for them would be a start. use influence if you have any to stop the ongoing and further creation of refugees. bring to light the action of the countries creating said refugees.
i'm assuming you, like mets has previously done, are trying to get to the answer "egypt should accept them" and thus make you feel better about israel disp
No actually, I don't care about the Egypt-Gaza example here. I do see why you'd think I'd be going there.
So we think they deserve:
-open borders (to an extent)
-humanitarian aid and funding
-the right to a safe place to live
Maybe compassion? Funding for education? Access to interest free debt (or nearly)? The right to settle into whatever safe homes they manage to find themselves in next? The right to bring their religion and customs with them?
Are we getting closer?
This is the one thing they will no longer accept. If Hamas lived on Staten Island, the USA would never accept it either.
i would hope that the US wouldn't kill tens of thousands of innocent New Yorkers and destroy all their schools, churches, and healthcare infrastructure in the process of not accepting it.
dude this is exactly what I have been seeing on twitter and saying in this thread for the last 3 months. ofc he says it far better than I could ever attempt.
South Africa did their homework. ofc there is no way in a million years that they ever win this case or even get a ceasefire. but this documentation will at least go down in history and in some years everyone will agree with them. it wont save the Gazans now though unfortunately.
No actually, I don't care about the Egypt-Gaza example here. I do see why you'd think I'd be going there.
So we think they deserve:
-open borders (to an extent)
-humanitarian aid and funding
-the right to a safe place to live
Maybe compassion? Funding for education? Access to interest free debt (or nearly)? The right to settle into whatever safe homes they manage to find themselves in next? The right to bring their religion and customs with the
can you just bring the attempt at a "gotcha" to a conclusion.
i would hope that the US wouldn't kill tens of thousands of innocent New Yorkers and destroy all their schools, churches, and healthcare infrastructure in the process of not accepting it.
Do you really think that's how that would go down?
If Staten island terrorists had launched 140 suicide bombs into Manhattan, you don't think Staten Island would be rubble based on America's track record even back then? Come on now.
Do you really think that's how that would go down?
If Staten island terrorists had launched 140 suicide bombs into Manhattan, you don't think Staten Island would be rubble based on America's track record even back then? Come on now.
no one is saying that's not how it would go down. i've already said america is not the example of the good guys. we simply arent.
This is the one thing they will no longer accept. If Hamas lived on Staten Island, the USA would never accept it either.
Living next door to radicalized genocidal terrorists with an infinitely long timeline on taking all of Israel is just off the table as of Oct 7th. That's the one thing that seems set in stone now.
I could certainly be wrong but the very close proximity seems like the major threat from hamas, through Palestine. If hamas doesn't surrender, how much of a security zone/empty space is believed to be needed?
despite having a bachelor's in history i really don't care about a historic right to a specific patch of dirt argument. which is why i generally have stayed out of all the arguments in this thread debating that topic.
innocent gazans were living in gaza in october, they deserve to live there in peace tomorrow. end of story. except israel has destroyed their empty homes and leveled most of the infrastructure because the goal isn't hamas it's ethnic cleansing. hamas is the justification.
I could certainly be wrong but the very close proximity seems like the major threat from hamas, through Palestine. If hamas doesn't surrender, how much of a security zone/empty space is believed to be needed?
They're trying to weaken them to the point that one of their "rivals" replaces them, to the betterment (I see the irony) of the lives of all Gazans on a much much longer timeline (obviously that's a very secondary goal for Israel). And then it's a massive deradicalization effort with the likes of the Saudis etc assisting. Remember this is about killing the Zionists, and making lots of money in the current model. It's not about improving the lives of Gazans (that's not on the radar for this Hamas leadership under Sinwar).
Hamas (Sinwar's Hamas) wants the Hezbollah model in Lebanon. It's well documented, it's not something we have to debate even. The Hezbollah model in Lebanon is ideal because they don't take any of the blame for governance issues in Lebanon. There's a government for that. They take the praise for any acts against the zionists, and they don't have to spend any time worrying about teacher's salaries and nurses and all the stuff that gets in the way of a holy war. This is the Sinwar school of thought. And he doesn't even have to achieve his goal, he only has to make sure the schools teach all the children to pick up where he left off. The struggles then continues, forever. And if you read the newest Hamas charter, it outright says no 2 state. It's all of Israel/Palestine (with zero room to bend there). That's the state of play.
So I give you this long winded answer to say that neither side wants a buffer zone. This is a fight where one of the fighters is going down. And that's traditionally how wars have ended.
despite having a bachelor's in history i really don't care about a historic right to a specific patch of dirt argument. which is why i generally have stayed out of all the arguments in this thread debating that topic.
innocent gazans were living in gaza in october, they deserve to live there in peace tomorrow. end of story. except israel has destroyed their empty homes and leveled most of the infrastructure because the goal isn't hamas it'
Again I simply asked when a group of people have their homes hopelessly destroyed, and their being ethnically cleansed or other, what rights do they have? And I mean way beyond legal. I mean ethically. I think my list was a good start?
I could certainly be wrong but the very close proximity seems like the major threat from hamas, through Palestine. If hamas doesn't surrender, how much of a security zone/empty space is believed to be needed?
Hamas has said many times that they stop their attacks as soon as the occupation is ended. they have offered the 1967 borders and de facto recognition of Israel if Palestinian "freedom" is granted.
Yassin’s demands are the same as the mainstream Palestinian movement, an Israeli withdrawal to the 1967 borders. Yassin adds that the 10-year truce does not mean accepting the legitimacy of Israel, or giving up Islam’s claim to all the land of former Palestine. Yassin says that Israel’s obliteration as a nation ‘is an expectation in the future. I say this from my reading of history.’
Hey let's negotiate!
I keep saying it. The timeline is forever, and the goal will not change. The 10 year truces mean nothing. No government can accept that. They can barely guarantee 5 day truces. Forget 10 years.
So ideally, the refugees cross borders into places where they can be safe, fed, etc.
I don't know how this would work for countries that would see their populations increase by 30% or more from it (and let's be honest that would create a near collapse for many countries). Like 100m South Americans busting into the USA if climate change gets real bad is a hell of a concept to consider.
But this is the closest thing to an answer that I've see
100m South Americans will not come to the USA and the only reason USA would have problems of that order if they did is because of racist *******s who would try to do civil war or something. Another 100 million people in the USA and the population density would still be a sixth of Germany's.
Do you really think that's how that would go down?
If Staten island terrorists had launched 140 suicide bombs into Manhattan, you don't think Staten Island would be rubble based on America's track record even back then? Come on now.
Don't know how often we have to tell you that America's response to terror attacks shouldn't be followed by anyone.
Yassin’s demands are the same as the mainstream Palestinian movement, an Israeli withdrawal to the 1967 borders. Yassin adds that the 10-year truce does not mean accepting the legitimacy of Israel, or giving up Islam’s claim to all the land of former Palestine. Yassin says that Israel’s obliteration as a nation ‘is an expectation in the future. I say this from my reading of history.’
Hey let's negotiate!
I keep saying it. The timeline is fore
10 year truces mean nothing! nothing at all!
