Death tolls mysteriously rise in Gaza

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT
 

Seanchaidh:

bastardofmelbourne:
My ideal future is one where disputes between nations and states are resolved via televised robot death matches.

It'd solve the problems with the NFL, too, because robots can't get concussions and can be programmed not to kneel during the anthem.

Better: they can be programmed to kneel during the anthem.

Bot Lives Matter

Also robots won't sue you for CTE related injuries.

CM156:

Seanchaidh:

bastardofmelbourne:
My ideal future is one where disputes between nations and states are resolved via televised robot death matches.

It'd solve the problems with the NFL, too, because robots can't get concussions and can be programmed not to kneel during the anthem.

Better: they can be programmed to kneel during the anthem.

Bot Lives Matter

Also robots won't sue you for CTE related injuries.

Chronic Traumatic Positropathy.

I suppose Israel was forced into this as well.

Grapes grow on trees?

Seanchaidh:

I suppose Israel was forced into this as well.

Clearly self-defense, those trees were growing right at them.

"When you lay siege to a city for a long time, fighting against it to capture it, do not destroy its trees by putting an ax to them, because you can eat their fruit. Do not cut them down. Are the trees people, that you should besiege them?" - Deuteronomy 20:19

ex951753:
Grapes grow on trees?

Some do, although the tree grapes are apparently closer to cashews and mangoes than vine grapes in their genome. But they also look and taste more like vine grapes.

Seanchaidh:

ex951753:
Grapes grow on trees?

Some do, although the tree grapes are apparently closer to cashews and mangoes than vine grapes in their genome. But they also look and taste more like vine grapes.

Nut grapes? Also, cashews and mangoes look similar?

trunkage:

Seanchaidh:

ex951753:
Grapes grow on trees?

Some do, although the tree grapes are apparently closer to cashews and mangoes than vine grapes in their genome. But they also look and taste more like vine grapes.

Nut grapes? Also, cashews and mangoes look similar?

Cashews and mangoes don't look similar; their trees are genetically related to grape trees.

ex951753:
Grapes grow on trees?

Yes:

1) Tree basically means a large plant of almost any type - coniferous, deciduous, grasses, etc. An old vine may eventually grow large enough to be called a tree.

2) Grape vines are climbing plants, and the vines traditionally grew around trees, so they indirectly grew on trees. This is pretty inefficient for grape growing in modern industry, so they're usually given frames to climb on instead nowdays.

She was coming right for them, I'm sure.

edit: Or maybe not.

Seanchaidh:

She was coming right for them, I'm sure.

edit: Or maybe not.

Well this is fucking depressing.

I can't pinpoint when the peace process died, but it's rotting in the ground right now.

CM156:

Seanchaidh:

She was coming right for them, I'm sure.

edit: Or maybe not.

Well this is fucking depressing.

I can't pinpoint when the peace process died, but it's rotting in the ground right now.

I don't think it ever really was alive. Too many extremists on both sides want blood. I'd dare say that 90% of both sides are close to the centre, but that ends up not mattering much matter. They just get overridden by the all those who yell

trunkage:

CM156:

Seanchaidh:

She was coming right for them, I'm sure.

edit: Or maybe not.

Well this is fucking depressing.

I can't pinpoint when the peace process died, but it's rotting in the ground right now.

I don't think it ever really was alive. Too many extremists on both sides want blood. I'd dare say that 90% of both sides are close to the centre, but that ends up not mattering much matter. They just get overridden by the all those who yell

The conditions for peace simply don't exist. I have the grim feeling that this issue will be resolved, one way or another, through another major world war.

CM156:
I can't pinpoint when the peace process died, but it's rotting in the ground right now.

It died with Rabin.

CM156:

The conditions for peace simply don't exist. I have the grim feeling that this issue will be resolved, one way or another, through another major world war.

You mean genocide, surely?

Living conditions inparts of the West Bank & Gaza have deteriorated well past Redmond Barrens Shadowrun 4E level social and economic devastation. By 2025 it will simply be unliveable.

Israel doesn't need a World War, it justr needs to keep doing what it's doing and eventually their problems will starve themselves.

Gethsemani:

hanselthecaretaker:

It wouldn?t be a conspiracy if the details behind it were concrete in the first place. It was one of the most major events in modern human history. When has any other major event in modern human history been so taboo to debate or at least technically examine that people are typically ostracized or in some cases locked up and even killed for doing so.

What we were taught in school:

Six million Jews were gassed and burned by the Nazis, and Hitler was the most evil person to have lived. That?s the general conception people have, at least in the West. If that?s all there was to it, then fine, but things like science, logic and reason would probably have more to say, if allowed to do so.

You act as if "science, logic and reason" hasn't already been saying a whole lot on this topic. The fact that we even know that six million Jewish people and another 6 million "undesirables" (among them 3 million Soviet prisoners of war, GLBT-people, people with cognitive impairment, Roma, slavs and people of several religious denominations) were killed in the systematic genocide known as the Holocaust is because the Holocaust has been extensively studied by researchers of many, many academic fields.

Let's cut the "just asking questions" (or "just making implications" in this case): There are thousands upon thousands of eye witness accounts to the Holocaust, there are hundreds of testimonies from people involved in the Holocaust, from Herman Goering himself down to camp guards and train drivers that ferried people to the camps. There are archives full of original Nazi documentation about the Holocaust and similar archives from both the US, UK and Red Army when they liberated the camps. Shit, the reason there are original Nazi documentation about the "Final Solution" is because they were actually proud of it and couldn't conceive of why anyone would condemn them for it. World War 2 is an incredibly well-researched part of history and even the war itself pales next to the extreme amount of research that has gone into the Holocaust.

So let me be clear, as a mod here: Discussing the the Holocaust is fine, it is an important historical event and can be discussed as such. But any attempt at denying, downplaying or legitimizing it is entirely unacceptable and will be met with swift mod action.

*oh cool, quote notifications are intermittently working again*

The old saying about winners of war writing history and never being asked if they told the truth applies indubitably here. Only one side is allowed to be told or at the very least considered legitimate.

I had a somewhat lengthy collection of thoughts that would've elaborated a bit on my previous post, but considering it probably wouldn't quite fall in line with the bold, I might as well just stay silent. And with that in a nutshell, it is no wonder why nothing changes.

hanselthecaretaker:
The old saying about winners of war writing history and never being asked if they told the truth applies indubitably here. Only one side is allowed to be told or at the very least considered legitimate.

People question the Holocaust all the time. Given that we know for an absolute fact that it happened, and that we can take a good guess at their motives, they aren't, or at least shouldn't be taken too seriously.

Thaluikhain:

hanselthecaretaker:
The old saying about winners of war writing history and never being asked if they told the truth applies indubitably here. Only one side is allowed to be told or at the very least considered legitimate.

People question the Holocaust all the time. Given that we know for an absolute fact that it happened, and that we can take a good guess at their motives, they aren't, or at least shouldn't be taken too seriously.

Not to mention that even IF the numbers are somehow inflated...The end result is the same: "Way too many innocent people were mass slaughtered".

At that point, the number is irrelevant. It's the end result and the intent that matter here.

Addendum_Forthcoming:
You mean genocide, surely?

Living conditions inparts of the West Bank & Gaza have deteriorated well past Redmond Barrens Shadowrun 4E level social and economic devastation. By 2025 it will simply be unliveable.

Israel doesn't need a World War, it justr needs to keep doing what it's doing and eventually their problems will starve themselves.

Yes. And I want to be very clear: I am not calling for a genocide here. I oppose genocides. Yet I can't help but to cynically think that nations might try them when they think they can get away with them.

aegix drakan:

Thaluikhain:

hanselthecaretaker:
The old saying about winners of war writing history and never being asked if they told the truth applies indubitably here. Only one side is allowed to be told or at the very least considered legitimate.

People question the Holocaust all the time. Given that we know for an absolute fact that it happened, and that we can take a good guess at their motives, they aren't, or at least shouldn't be taken too seriously.

Not to mention that even IF the numbers are somehow inflated...The end result is the same: "Way too many innocent people were mass slaughtered".

At that point, the number is irrelevant. It's the end result and the intent that matter here.

That, and it's not just winners who write history. German members of the governments after both World War I and World War II wrote books that have had a large effect on how we view both events.

Thaluikhain:

hanselthecaretaker:
The old saying about winners of war writing history and never being asked if they told the truth applies indubitably here. Only one side is allowed to be told or at the very least considered legitimate.

People question the Holocaust all the time. Given that we know for an absolute fact that it happened, and that we can take a good guess at their motives, they aren't, or at least shouldn't be taken too seriously.

I was going to point out Lost Cause

CM156:
I can't pinpoint when the peace process died, but it's rotting in the ground right now.

It starts with the failure of the Oslo Peace Accords in the 1990s. The failure led to the second intifada, and I think that was a deeply ill-considered move by the Palestinian leaders that hardened Israeli hearts considerably.

After that, probably the death of Ariel Sharon. Despite his early rhetoric and political career, Sharon seemed to be moving towards a practical two-state solution. With his death I think the centre-right moderates didn't have an effective leader any more; the hardliner Netanyahu then wrapped things up on the right. I believe the peace process won't move an inch until he goes.

Ugh, fuck, I cannot for the life of any creature understand how people can look at Israel's actions over the decades and find them the better side worth defending in all of this. It seiously doesn't follow any form of reasonable logic. It's not like they're Trump and perceived as some last bastion of hope against the oppressive regime of PC fluffkins simultaneously somehow all snowflakes but also very scary and in control of everything. Now they're only more encouraged to continue their treatment of these people is if they're nothing more than vermin needing to be eradicated of the environment. And other countries just stand by and impotently shake their fists for how much longer now? The more desperation and fear people are pushed towards, the more desperate their actions become as they look to further extremes and others offering hope for a way out, which as per usual will only be used as justification for more eradication.

Xsjadoblayde:
Ugh, fuck, I cannot for the life of any creature understand how people can look at Israel's actions over the decades and find them the better side worth defending in all of this.

On the contrary, I think it's very easy to understand why Israel behaves as it does, and why it might be considered the better party. Hundreds of years of persecution of the Jews ending in an attempt at wholesale extermination, followed by three attempts to eliminate the new Jewish state in as many decades would make Israel extremely security-conscious. It surely has a broadly liberal, democratic society (and a society considerably more pleasant than its neighbours), and that it has built that under that much pressure is to its credit.

I think a major problem for me is that I think they drive the idea that Israel should do better. Firstly, it is carrying out an indefinite, oppressive occupation fundamentally at odds with the notion of a liberal democracy. Secondly, despite all the dispossession, disenfranchisement and persecution of the Jews throughout history, Israel was born and continues to expand through dispossession, disenfranchisement and persecution of another people.

We know that when a person is brutalised, one of the potential results is that they themselves become inclined to brutalise others. So it effectively works on a societal level too, not least because societies are made up of lots of people. Threat and abuse cause fear, anger, hatred; fear, anger and hatred drive justification and tolerance of abusing others. My sadness is that that is what Israel seems to be choosing. It doesn't have to.

Agema:

On the contrary, I think it's very easy to understand why Israel behaves as it does, and why it might be considered the better party. Hundreds of years of persecution of the Jews ending in an attempt at wholesale extermination, followed by three attempts to eliminate the new Jewish state in as many decades would make Israel extremely security-conscious. It surely has a broadly liberal, democratic society (and a society considerably more pleasant than its neighbours), and that it has built that under that much pressure is to its credit.

I think a major problem for me is that I think they drive the idea that Israel should do better. Firstly, it is carrying out an indefinite, oppressive occupation fundamentally at odds with the notion of a liberal democracy. Secondly, despite all the dispossession, disenfranchisement and persecution of the Jews throughout history, Israel was born and continues to expand through dispossession, disenfranchisement and persecution of another people.

We know that when a person is brutalised, one of the potential results is that they themselves become inclined to brutalise others. So it effectively works on a societal level too, not least because societies are made up of lots of people. Threat and abuse cause fear, anger, hatred; fear, anger and hatred drive justification and tolerance of abusing others. My sadness is that that is what Israel seems to be choosing. It doesn't have to.

Yeah, that much is understood, but understanding is different from defending inhumane treatment. Learning how an abuser or a serial killer came to be, through their own past suffering is one thing. Looking at their victims and saying they had it coming is something else entirely. That is the mindset I find tricky to empathise with.

Xsjadoblayde:
Ugh, fuck, I cannot for the life of any creature understand how people can look at Israel's actions over the decades and find them the better side worth defending in all of this. It seiously doesn't follow any form of reasonable logic.

On the contrary, it is the ONLY logical conclusion. The Arabs, led by Hamas are brainwashed and raised on a diet of hatred, bitterness and the belief that their lives are worth nothing, that the best thing they can do with their lives is to die "martyrs" fighting the infidels.

Israel is the most open, tolerant, equal and fair society in the middle east. It is a bastion of democracy where all races, genders, sexual orientations and faiths are treated equally and without discrimination. Israel has freedom of the press and religion, and in fact, muslims living in Israel have MORE protections and rights than in any muslim ruled country. It has been the victim in every conflict with the arabs throughout history, it has never been the aggressor. The Palestinian arabs are the result of a failed attempt by the arabs to genocide the Jews over 50 years ago. Israel not only defended itself from destruction at the hands of five arab armies, but defeated them utterly. It has since made a lasting peace with two of its neighbours and has offered Palestinians a state of their own on multiple occasions, each one of which they refused.

The Palestinians on the other hand punish selling land to a Jew by death. Christians are attacked and being chased out of their homes. Homosexuals are stoned to death or thrown from buildings and women raped by their husbands are sent home by police and told to stop complaining. Gazans live under a brutal, Islamist, sharia regime. There is no freedom of the press and reporting or speaking out against Hamas will get you executed. In 70 years, while Israel has turned a desert into an oasis of prosperity, the Palestinians have turned Gaza into rubble and dust. It's not enough that they've ruined Gaza, they're now set about destroying Israel too.

Hamas are a terrorist organisation according to the UN and every major country, including most Arab states. Iran still takes the same official line and is the true source of all the tensions there.

Defending Israel is the only choice for someone right minded, who believes in life, freedom, equality, democracy and peace. Hamas are a vile, evil organisation that use their own people as human shields and statistics to fuel more hatred. Israel has every right to defend itself and the IDF has a DUTY to defend Israeli citizens from these rock throwing, fire chucking, brainwashed murderous savages at their gates. No country would tolerate islamic terrorists trying to murder their civilians.

The fighting will stop when the Palestinians want it to, and not before. They live in a place of their own making and as long as Hamas rules Gaza and remain at war with Israel, nothing will change.

KingsGambit:
On the contrary, it is the ONLY logical conclusion. The Arabs, led by Hamas are brainwashed and raised on a diet of hatred, bitterness and the belief that their lives are worth nothing, that the best thing they can do with their lives is to die "martyrs" fighting the infidels.

See for instance:
http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/the-surprising-opinions-of-palestinians

So it is with any democracy, the Palestinian governing parties do not necessarily represent the wishes of their people. Like anyone, the Palestinians have to make grubby political decisions where they elect "least worst option" parties where they disagree with many of the individual policies of their government. And particularly in the case of Gaza, where Hamas is a paramilitary group potentially not that interested in free and fair elections or democratically representing the will of Gazans. (I believe Hamas have agreed to elections later this year; whether it will contest them fairly remains to be seen.)

What is it about you that you would deny the Palestinians even the dignity of treating them like normal human beings?

Defending Israel is the only choice for someone right minded, who believes in life, freedom, equality, democracy and peace.

Defending Israel's right to exist is what people who believe in life, freedom, equality, democracy and peace should do. But those people should also deplore the fact that Israel is a major player in the denial of those same opportunities to the Palestinians.

Agema:
What is it about you that you would deny the Palestinians even the dignity of treating them like normal human beings?

I don't deny them that at all. I wish for them a peaceful state of their own, ruled by law and in which they can prosper and lead long, full, productive lives with dignity and security. Hamas is denying them that. There cannot be peace unless they accept Israel's right to exist.. If you want to see Palestnians treated with actual indignity, try looking at Lebanon.

Defending Israel's right to DEFEND ITSELF is what people who believe in life, freedom, equality, democracy and peace should do.

Fixed that for you. Every state has the right to defend its borders.

But those people should also deplore the fact that Israel is a major player in the denial of those same opportunities to the Palestinians.

Hey, the West Bank called, said they'd like to have a word. The West Bank, still under partial occupation (unlike Gaza which is completely unoccupied) has a growing economy, less civil unrest, civilians aren't murdered by their own government, they aren't ruled by Sharia and have working utilities. So under Israeli occupation the West Bank is THRIVING vs Gaza without any occupation. Hamas are destroying Gaza and the lives of the people within it. Israel has every right to defend its borders and I have no sympathy for anyone who charges and armed soldier with the intent to kill them and ends up shot. They can put down their rocks, kites, molotovs and slings any time. Hamas are radical islamist terrorists bent on murder and death of Jews and Gazans alike and have no interest in peace or a two-state solution. Every untargetted rocket they fire at Israeli civilian centres and use of Gazan civilians as human shields is a contravention of the Geneva Conventions and a war crime. But they're terrorists, the law doesn't apply to them.

There is NO moral equivalence whatsoever. Hamas are wholly responsible for every single death since this violent protest began. Every. Single. One. Even the European Parliament, which always condemns Israel, acknowledged Hamas' culpability.

KingsGambit:
Every state has the right to defend its borders.

And which borders are those, exactly? Because when it comes to things like settlers in the West Bank, they seem less and less concerned about where Israel's recognized jurisdiction ends.

CM156:

KingsGambit:
Every state has the right to defend its borders.

And which borders are those, exactly? Because when it comes to things like settlers in the West Bank, they seem less and less concerned about where Israel's recognized jurisdiction ends.

The security fence between Gaza and Israel is the one Hamas are attacking, but Iranian drones have also been shot down by the Syrian border where Hezbollah, yet another fundamentalist islamic terrorist group, are based (or at least were). Settlers in the West Bank aren't the issue. Arabs were murdering Jews 50 years ago, they were murdering Jews 20 years ago and there weren't settlements then. They certainly don't help matters and if in some fantasy future there was a land-for-peace deal, they would necessarily need to be debated, but they aren't the issue.

Arabs have been trying to murder Jews for more than a century, 50 years before the Palestinians even existed. Jews were murdered and chased out of practically all arab lands, yet amazingly there's not a soul in the west calling for justice for them. There are no Jews in Gaza but it's Gaza that's rioting, not the West Bank. Israel have tried to give them the West Bank and Gaza multiple times, and they don't want it, won't accept it. Israel is in control of the West Bank because a) the Palestinians won't take it, b) no one else wants it (Jordan would not take it back in the treaty) and c) if they withdrew, history has proven exactly what will happen. They left Gaza unilaterally in 2005 to let the Palestinians have it for themselves and were rewarded with tens of thousands of rockets, suicide bombs, stabbings, rammings, terror and smuggling tunnels and kidnappings.

If you were in charge of the IDF, with Hamas terrorists at your border, baying for blood, chanting Allahu Akbar, throwing rocks and molotovs, determined to murder you, your family and your people, what would you tell the soldiers under your command to do? Let them in? If Hamas entered Israel, it would be rubble in a decade, just like they did with Gaza. No country would allow islamic terrorists to murder its civilians, not one.

But to summarise, which borders? All their borders. Israel has to maintain absolute sovereignty over its airspace and borders or those that want to destroy it (ie. all of them) will be able to. The USA protects its borders, so does the UK, so does Russia, China, Australia, you name the country, they control their borders.

KingsGambit:
snip.

Gambit. No one has denied Hamas is terrible. Let that sink in. Read it again. Hamas is terrible.

That does not excuse IDFs behaviour. Two wrongs don't make a right. The only thing stopping the IDF from being called terrorists is that they are the ones in power. I see Natanyahu as no better than Erdogan or Al Assad. Killing people in their country who aren't of the same race.

We give power to governments and then limit them so they don't abuse it. Palestinians are within the bounds of the IDF. It's their job to protect every. That doesn't mean evicting Palestianians. That means the should be careful who they shoot at. The latter is really hard work. But if you want to be the IDF it's your responsibility to be the adult. Everyone else can act like children, but you, as a government arm, HAVE to big the better person.

KingsGambit:
ettlers in the West Bank aren't the issue.

There is no one "issue"
The Arabs see settlers as illegal land grabbers. And considering the condemnation from the UN, much of the world seems to agree. Granted, nobody really gives much of a shit what the UN thinks.

Arabs have been trying to murder Jews for more than a century, 50 years before the Palestinians even existed. Jews were murdered and chased out of practically all arab lands, yet amazingly there's not a soul in the west calling for justice for them.

Ah, you're talking about the expulsion of Jews from Arab countries. Weirdly enough, I agree with you there. It's also why I'm skeptical of the notion of a "right to return" that passes down through generations. The Indians/Pakistanis displaced by the partition received no such right, nor did the ethnic Germans expelled from various European countries after WWII (Those who had lived there for centuries, not German settlers). Note that these two events occurred around the same time as the Nabka.

If you were in charge of the IDF, with Hamas terrorists at your border, baying for blood, chanting Allahu Akbar, throwing rocks and molotovs, determined to murder you, your family and your people, what would you tell the soldiers under your command to do? Let them in? If Hamas entered Israel, it would be rubble in a decade, just like they did with Gaza. No country would allow islamic terrorists to murder its civilians, not one.

I wouldn't have them fire from the distance they were firing from. Even if I accept the notion that the medics and journalists shot were shot by mistake (which I do, in absence of any proof they were intentional), Israel is still negligent for engaging with the enemy from that distance where such mistakes happen.

But to summarise, which borders? All their borders. Israel has to maintain absolute sovereignty over its airspace and borders or those that want to destroy it (ie. all of them) will be able to. The USA protects its borders, so does the UK, so does Russia, China, Australia, you name the country, they control their borders.

So are the West Bank settlers within Israel's ill-defined borders? You seem to be dodging that issue here.

KingsGambit:
I don't deny them that at all. I wish for them a peaceful state of their own, ruled by law and in which they can prosper and lead long, full, productive lives with dignity and security. Hamas is denying them that. There cannot be peace unless they accept Israel's right to exist...

Hamas can be talked to. They might agree to accept Israel's right to exist in return for an adequate settlement, and some Hamas leaders have suggested so. This is not dissimilar to what happened with the IRA, which disarmed and (with Sinn Fein) essentially agreed to tolerate British ownership of NI until democracy might decide otherwise. Never mind that Hamas are entrenched in a small pocket of the Palestinian territories - how does this justify holding the entire Palestinian territories hostage?

If we want people to have productive lives with dignity and security, it doesn't happen by restricting them. All restricting people does is slow their development, make them unhappy, angry and frustrated. We in the West didn't develop our liberal societies by being beaten into order by an external party: we did it through development of political and economic freedom. So it will be with the Palestinians: give them the means for growing their own human development. Build hospitals, schools, businesses, infrastructure. Give them rights and responsibilities, and they can learn to use them. They'll screw up occasionally, but that's part of learning. They'll still have bad apples, but every society has discontents and criminals.

Fixed that for you. Every state has the right to defend its borders.

It's so close to the same thing it makes no practical difference.

Although let's bear in mind this is not a proper border. A border is a point where the two countries on either side agree their territory stops. Israel's "border" with the Palestinian Territories is a line in the sand Israel has unilaterally imposed with precious little interest in what the Palestinians (or international community) think about it. Israel surely has a right to protect its citizens from harm with proportionate action. However, that doesn't necessary mean gunning people down because they're near an arbitrarily placed fence.

Hey, the West Bank called, said they'd like to have a word.

You're just wrong.

Even in the West Bank, Israel limits opportunities of house-building, agriculture, industry, finance, and occupies natural resources like water, which the Palestinians therefore cannot benefit from. Checkpoints can severely disrupt economic activity: Eastern Jerusalem saw a major economic drop as effectively it became a Palestinian commericial hub partially cut off from suppliers and customers. The West Bank is hugely over-reliant on foreign aid, and even still the economy grows well below what it probably should: GDP per capita has been pretty much stagnant for over 5 years. Which is, to be fair, a step up from Gaza. The West Bank has at least something to make money out of; Gaza is a city in a desert with almost nothing it can do without imports - which are of course heavily restricted.

KingsGambit:
Arabs were murdering Jews 50 years ago, they were murdering Jews 20 years ago and there weren't settlements then.

Let's bear in mind that in the 1940s, Jews murdered plenty of Arabs too. Nor forget Jews were busy murdering Britons too, in an attempt to hurry up the process of the UK giving them their own state. But sure, it's not okay when other people do it, eh?

Israel is in control of the West Bank because a) the Palestinians won't take it, b) no one else wants it (Jordan would not take it back in the treaty)

1) The Palestinians will take the West Bank depending upon agreed conditions, because those conditions matter a great deal.

2) When Jordan tried to formally annex the West Bank after 1948, it was not recognised by the international community. It lost it to Israel in 1967. It surrendered claims to it when the Arab world recognised the PLO as Palestinian representative in the early 1970s, and cut all remaining ties in the 1980s. I have no idea what treaty you're talking about, because no-one has ever meaningfully offered it to Jordan.

trunkage:
That does not excuse IDFs behaviour. Two wrongs don't make a right. The only thing stopping the IDF from being called terrorists is that they are the ones in power. I see Natanyahu as no better than Erdogan or Al Assad. Killing people in their country who aren't of the same race.

Everything you've said is incorrect. Your first point makes sense if you believe that the IDF defending Israel's border is wrong. However, there is a security fence and Hamas are attacking it with fire bombs, fire kites and slings murdering Israelis. The IDF have a DUTY to defend Israel and the border is the line that cannot be crossed.

Second the IDF aren't "the ones in power". The IDF is Israel's defence force. Hamas is the "elected" government in control of Gaza. Hamas are the ones in charge. They're the ones who started the riots. They're the ones driving Gazans to the fence with the promise of money if they're maimed or killed (aka "martyred"). They're the ones who raise children to hate and believe that murdering Jews is the highest calling.

Third, if you see Netanyahu as the same as Al Assad, I cannot help you. I would go as far as saying you are not a reasonable person at that point. There's no equivalence, at all. In Israel, you can have a free press and criticise the PM all you like. They have a Knesset where things are debated. In Syria, if you say a word against Al Assad, you'll disappear and never be seen again. In Turkey, if you blog that Erdogan is like Gollum, you go to jail. Israel is a liberal democracy with free press, freedom of religion, equality for all. Comparing it to Turkey and Syria is either willfully ignorant, biased, racist or uninformed. There is no comparison, none at all.

Fourth, Israel does not target people of different races in their own country. Muslims and Arabs living in Israel in fact have MORE rights and freedoms than in ANY other country in the world, including the USA and muslim ruled countries. Israel has Arab MKs, olympic athletes, IDF soldiers, Eurovision entrants, international footballers and anyone of any race enjoys the full protection of the law. Former PM Olmert was jailed by a muslim judge. At Al Aqsa Mosque, non-muslims are forbidden to pray there and this is enforced by Israeli police. Israeli police turn away Jews to protect this most racist law that discriminates against Jews, but they do it. Tel Aviv has the most thriving gay scene anywhere in the middle east, and possibly Asia (tho I wouldn't swear to that last part). Women have full equal rights.

On the flipside in Gaza, selling land to a Jew is punishable by death. A Jew cannot own land there. Gaza is ruled by Hamas who follow strict Sharia law. Homosexuals are stoned, beheaded or thrown from buildings. Women are beaten by their husbands or honour killed for bringing "shame" to their families. Hamas will arrest or extra-judicially execute any citizen or reporter who dares speak against them or reports the wrong message (generally the evil Israeli, poor Gazan victim narrative). Christians have been chased out of Bethlehem, the birthplace of Christ and the population is dwindling.

I don't believe you're a racist. I don't believe you're unreasonable. I believe you're uninformed, and I say that in a polite way and hope you'll reasonably read what I've written. Israel is defending itself from fundamentalist islamic terrorists, that is the fact of the matter. Any nation would defend its border from an enemy who has been doing their best to murder its civilians for years, says on TV that they want to rip the hearts from their chests. Hamas are brutal, fundamentalist islamic terrorists whose only goal is dead Jews. They don't care about their own lives (they honestly believe in jihad and martyrdom), let alone those of other Gazans. Every body in this conflict is there because Hamas willed it, every single one, on both sides.

Agema:
Let's bear in mind that in the 1940s, Jews murdered plenty of Arabs too.

No, not murdering, killing in war. A war the Arabs started to genocide the Jews.

Agema:
Nor forget Jews were busy murdering Britons too,

No, not murdering, killing in war. There is a world of difference and you won't pull a trick by trying to make a moral equivalence. Killing in war is not murder and that is evident in this incident. Rioting Gazans aren't being murdered, they're being killed in war. If there were individual cases of murder you can cite, I'll condemn the individuals, and I also sympathise for the innocents caught in the crossfire. But this is the fault of Hamas, it's their riot and I blame them 100% for every death.

Agema:
1) The Palestinians will take the West Bank depending upon agreed conditions, because those conditions matter a great deal.

And that is the crux of the issue. But so far, they've been offered a state of their own multiple times and turned it down every single time. Right of Return will never happen, nor should it and if they think they'll get Jerusalem they're in a fantasy land. Also, they have to disarm and Israel will wholly control the airspace. Those are the non-negotiables from Israel's PoV. Everything else, such as where border lines are drawn is up for debate.

Agema:
Hamas can be talked to.

Hamas cannot be talked to, reasoned or bargained with. They exist to murder jews from the river to sea. They don't want peace, they don't want Gaza. They want all the land and all the Jews dead. There's no middle ground. The only way forward is for Palestinians to throw Hamas to the kerb and elect new leadership. Hamas are islamic terrorists who follow jihad and death, they want to spread sharia law and have an islamic caliphate. They believe in martyrdom, that dying while murdering Jews will lead to a lifetime in paradise. There's a reason that there hasn't been an election in Gaza since 2005, and likely never will be.

You're just wrong.

No, I'm right.

Even in the West Bank, Israel limits opportunities of house-building, agriculture, industry, finance, and occupies natural resources like water, which the Palestinians therefore cannot benefit from. Checkpoints can severely disrupt economic activity:

That is absolutely and completely true. If the Palestinians want a state of their own, they should make a treaty. Until then however, Israel has a DUTY to stay there to protect Israelis. The Palestinians face hardship because they refuse to make peace. They tried to genocide the Jews in 67, lost and these are the consequences of that and every other war they've started with Israel. They suffer because of their own actions and if I were personally commanding the IDF now, I would consider reoccupying Gaza.

The Palestinians do not have a country or a state, the West Bank is not theirs until they treat for it. If you were in command of the IDF, after seeing what happened when they pulled out of Gaza in 2005, you would not withdraw from the West Bank either. The checkpoints are also to protect Israelis by limiting people and rocket parts crossing the border and killing Jews. They are a necessary evil necessitated by an enemy that will behead babies (search Fogel family, i won't link it here), stab families to death around a dinner table (search Salomon family, I won't link it here), set off suicide vests, and the rest.

CM156:
I wouldn't have them fire from the distance they were firing from. Even if I accept the notion that the medics and journalists shot were shot by mistake (which I do, in absence of any proof they were intentional), Israel is still negligent for engaging with the enemy from that distance where such mistakes happen.

Where is the line then? The line has to be somewhere. There is a border, there is a security fence and IDF soldiers have to have specific orders. If someone approaches the fence within this distance, fire. Hamas knows this and they go anyway. Why? Because they want the bodies.

I am the most reasonable minded person you'll ever meet. I abhor violence and guns, am against intolerance and am for peace and love and all the hippy shit. I like video games, deadpan comedy, fantasy novels and drink too much Coca Cola. And if I were in command of the IDF I would have my soldiers shoot anyone approaching the security fence with molotovs and fire kites. Those are the orders I would give and anyone who says differently IMO is biased against Israel.

If an attacker charged a policeman or soldier in the USA with a brick or molotov, what's the cop going to do? They'll shoot them and I'll 100% defend the cop for doing so and say they absolutely did the right thing, despite that a human died. Why? Because it's the attackers fault. And same here. Hamas and the Gazans are attacking Israel, not the other way around and the IDF's duty is protecting Israelis from death at the hands of fundamentalist islamic terror, which is EXACTLY what is happening. EXACTLY. No one hesitates to condemn ISIS or Al Qaeeda, the Taliban or Boko Haram, but Hamas and Hezbollah get a free pass. Why? Because they're mostly (but not exclusively) targetting Jews, and murdering or discriminating against Jews is not a problem.

So are the West Bank settlers within Israel's ill-defined borders?

I'm not dodging the issue at all. Israel is currently occupying the West Bank which makes it under Israeli control (zone A wholly Israel, Zone B mixed, Zone C wholly PA). The West Bank does NOT belong to the Palestinians, Israel has been in control of it for decades. They have no state, and never have done. If they want one, they could negotiate a peace treaty. The West Bank IS contested without a doubt, and I believe it SHOULD be a state for the Palestinians in a peaceful two-state solution alongside Israel.

But as I mentioned, the West Bank settlers aren't the issue. Gaza is rioting, not the west bank and Gaza is not occupied. In fact a Jew in Gaza would probably be murdered and cannot even own land (it's okay to discriminate against Jews tho, so we won't comment on that detail). The first two intifadas happened before there were settlements, Arabs have been murdering Jews for decades before the settlements existed. They are not helping matters, but they are not the issue.

The issue is that Hamas wants to murder all the Jews and destroy Israel. The longer the Arabs go without a land-for-peace treaty, the more settlements are likely to spring up. The settlements will only be an actual issue if and when the two warring sides sit around a negotiating table and discuss what's to happen to the Jews living there. Solutions could include a) the Jews leaving and gifting the homes to the Palestinians, b) Israel keeping that area and instead giving a different area of land elsewhere along the future border, c) some form of citizen swap/enclave, d) something I haven't thought of, but is solvable.

Agema:
If we want people to have productive lives with dignity and security, it doesn't happen by restricting them. All restricting people does is slow their development, make them unhappy, angry and frustrated. We in the West didn't develop our liberal societies by being beaten into order by an external party: we did it through development of political and economic freedom. So it will be with the Palestinians: give them the means for growing their own human development. Build hospitals, schools, businesses, infrastructure. Give them rights and responsibilities, and they can learn to use them.

I completely agree. The Palestinians need a govmt that builds hospitals and schools, instead of stockpiling rockets in them. They need a govmt that builds social infrastructure instead of a tunnel network for smuggling and kidnapping israelis. This is the first thing you've said I agree with entirely. Israel left behind millions of dollars of greenhouses to give Gaza a start to an agriculture indistry to stir their economy. It was rubble in no time flat.

Israel is not responsible for building Gazan schools, that's Gaza's elected govmt's job. But since they have little economy and all foreign aid they receive is lost to corruption, building terror tunnels and buying weapons and rocket parts, they Gazan govmt could be said to have the wrong priorities. This is precisely the reason, by the way, that the West Bank has a growing, healthy economy.

Although let's bear in mind this is not a proper border. A border is a point where the two countries on either side agree their territory stops. Israel's "border" with the Palestinian Territories is a line in the sand Israel has unilaterally imposed with precious little interest in what the Palestinians (or international community) think about it.

First, the International community will and has condemned everything Israel has ever done, ever. As such, if Israel had to care what the "International Community" thought, all its citizens would be dead by now. And it's at war with Hamas, so they don't get a say. The sad reality is that to protect Israel, the IDF has to protect the border which is under attack. As such, Gazans will die and Israel will be condemned for defending itself. The choice is a) don't defend itself, Israelis die but international community is ??? (happy?) or b) defend itself, terrorists and some civilians die and people aren't happy. I would choose living citizens and unhappy UN every time. You can't bring back dead citizens and most of the world has an agenda against Israel because they're hypocrites. No one criticises Turkey for the Armenian genocide or occupying Cyprus. No one criticises China for Tibet.

Second, there has never been a border there, only an armistice line (green line). That is approximately where the security fence is. I'm not going to argue over 5 meters here, or if it's crossing this road. The reality is there is a fence, it's there to keep Palestinians out of Israel because history has shown that without it Jews will get murdered in huge numbers. If you deny the intifidas and suicide bombs, stabbings and rammings, then I would say you are not a reasonable person.

Israel surely has a right to protect its citizens from harm with proportionate action. However, that doesn't necessary mean gunning people down because they're near an arbitrarily placed fence.

It isn't a proper border only insofar as Gaza is not a State. However it is a border and not arbitrary. That is where Israel has drawn the line and that is the line the IDF are defending. Any Gazan who tries to breach the fence does so knowing the consequences and I have no sympathy. I sympathise for their plight, but not for their own actions that result in their death. People aren't being "gunned down" as you try to put it to make it sound like cold blooded murder. They are being shot for using slings to fire rocks, fire bombs, fire kites and trying to breach the security fence.

Israel either has the right to defend itself, or it does not. If a person said Israel does not have the right to defend itself, then I would call them unreasonable and hypocritical. If Israel does have that right and the border fence is the line they've drawn then the IDF have not only the right but the DUTY to shoot anyone who tries to breach it. I will defend any soldier protecting the border in the same way I would defend a policeman for shooting a charging attacker who didn't stop when they were told to. The fault is on the attacker, not the soldier. And in this case, the fault is on Hamas for driving Gazan civilians to their deaths for what is essentially an anti-Israel marketing campaign.

KingsGambit:
In Israel, you can have a free press and criticise the PM all you like.

Except, you know, for the military censor. Like if I wanted to write an article on Israel's nuclear weapons program, I would have to do so safely within my own country. That is, assuming that Israel doesn't once again try to use American courts to exercise prior restraint.

No, not murdering, killing in war. A war the Arabs started to genocide the Jews.

I think he's talking about Jewish paramilitary during the British Mandatory period who killed semi-indiscriminately in order to get the British to leave. Blew up that hotel.

And that is the crux of the issue. But so far, they've been offered a state of their own multiple times and turned it down every single time. Right of Return will never happen, nor should it and if they think they'll get Jerusalem they're in a fantasy land. Also, they have to disarm and Israel will wholly control the airspace. Those are the non-negotiables from Israel's PoV. Everything else, such as where border lines are drawn is up for debate.

So in other words, a sovereign nation without many of the rights that come with sovereignty.

Where is the line then? The line has to be somewhere. There is a border, there is a security fence and IDF soldiers have to have specific orders. If someone approaches the fence within this distance, fire. Hamas knows this and they go anyway. Why? Because they want the bodies.

The moment they set foot on Israeli soil. If someone's charging at the US-Mexico border from the Mexican side, border agents can't just unload into that person, regardless of what they are carrying. In fact, there's someone on trial for that.

I'm not dodging the issue at all. Israel is currently occupying the West Bank which makes it under Israeli control (zone A wholly Israel, Zone B mixed, Zone C wholly PA). The West Bank does NOT belong to the Palestinians, Israel has been in control of it for decades. They have no state, and never have done. If they want one, they could negotiate a peace treaty. The West Bank IS contested without a doubt, and I believe it SHOULD be a state for the Palestinians in a peaceful two-state solution alongside Israel.

But as I mentioned, the West Bank settlers aren't the issue. Gaza is rioting, not the west bank and Gaza is not occupied. In fact a Jew in Gaza would probably be murdered and cannot even own land (it's okay to discriminate against Jews tho, so we won't comment on that detail). The first two intifadas happened before there were settlements, Arabs have been murdering Jews for decades before the settlements existed. They are not helping matters, but they are not the issue.

The issue is that Hamas wants to murder all the Jews and destroy Israel. The longer the Arabs go without a land-for-peace treaty, the more settlements are likely to spring up. The settlements will only be an actual issue if and when the two warring sides sit around a negotiating table and discuss what's to happen to the Jews living there. Solutions could include a) the Jews leaving and gifting the homes to the Palestinians, b) Israel keeping that area and instead giving a different area of land elsewhere along the future border, c) some form of citizen swap/enclave, d) something I haven't thought of, but is solvable.

All of this dodges the issue that it's a violation of international law to move settlers into an area you militarily occupy. Not that Israel is unique in this: Turkey did it in Cyprus

No one criticises Turkey for the Armenian genocide or occupying Cyprus. No one criticises China for Tibet.

Plenty of nations do both. Speaking of The Armenian Genocide, it's a genocide Israel doesn't acknowledge. Really joggin my noggin as to why. On the plus side, if Turkey's sultan continues behaving like a belligerent dolt, Israel might just acknowledge the genocide out of spite. Better than nothing, I suppose.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here