The General Terrorist Rampage Thread

[gourimoko]

I'd say that they know a single state solution will not happen, and that therefore, their attempts to make an "other" solution impossible is instead an attempt to make any solution period possible.

Wait.. say what?

The only other explanation is that they will use the additional settlements as eventual leverage/givebacks to get the most favorable two-state solution they can.

That may be how this is eventually resolved, albeit under a different government.

The other explanation is that they (the current government) have no intention of creating a viable Palestinian state, and instead, hope to reach a point where they will create semi-autonomous bantustans with which the Palestinians are to be corralled.

I would imagine the ultimate goal, other than a land grab, is the belief that you can enact some basic form of population control by confining any given group of people to an ever diminishing land area. This evidenced by the stark deviation in rate of population growth between the West Bank and Gaza.

Essentially, the plan to establish 'Eretz Israel,' or an Israeli state from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River, would likely result in the West Bank being broken up into pieces that would begin to resemble Gaza, more and more.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

Wait.. say what?

That should have been "impossible".

The other explanation is that they (the current government) have no intention of creating a viable Palestinian state, and instead, hope to reach a point where they will create semi-autonomous bantustans with which the Palestinians are to be corralled.

I would imagine the ultimate goal, other than a land grab, is the belief that you can enact some basic form of population control by confining any given group of people to an ever diminishing land area. This evidenced by the stark deviation in rate of population growth between the West Bank and Gaza.

Essentially, the plan to establish 'Eretz Israel,' or an Israeli state from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River, would likely result in the West Bank being broken up into pieces that would begin to resemble Gaza, more and more.

Sure, that's possible as well, which would be awful. I was simply mentioning a possible resolution that would still be feasible with the current Israeli actions. And to be honest, that's what I think will eventually happen. Israel will end up giving up all or most of that land in exchange for peace.

 

[gourimoko]

Sure, that's possible as well, which would be awful. I was simply mentioning a possible resolution that would still be feasible with the current Israeli actions. And to be honest, that's what I think will eventually happen. Israel will end up giving up all or most of that land in exchange for peace.

I really don't see any indication of that happening; unfortunately. And even if it did, it wouldn't solve the problem within Israel - it would likely only delay the inevitable.

 

[LennoxLewis]

You may not realize this, but I was actually in the process of writing a post arguing against the single-state solution (a response to @jking948 's earlier post about the two state solution)..

Once I saw you response, though, I couldn't help myself....

But seriously, I don't pretend that a single-state solution would be ideal; I'm simply acknowledging the fact that it seems quite evident that the government of Israel is making any other potential solution impossible.

The continuation of expansion of the de facto Israeli border with settlements and security outposts, and the continued acquisition of land whether formally annexed or not essentially destroys any viability that might exist for a proposed Palestinian state.

Furthermore, the Israeli "immigration" policy, and well as the institutionally racist policies of it's government towards Arabs and Muslims create an intolerable situation - but a situation that, without the persistence of those laws, would very likely lead to the dissolution of a Zionist political majority; which is this death knell that Netanyahu is actually referring to.

Because without those laws in place; and with the creation of a functional Palestinian state; you would still see Palestinians returning to Israel.

So without laws in place that attempt to control 6 million Arabs immediately under Israeli control, whether by erecting virtual borders, occupation, discrimination, second class citizenship; then the concept of a Jewish State will cease to exist.

The problem is that Netanyahu and many other militant Zionists use the fear of a second holocaust to conflate and confuse issues relating to the occupation with the supposed imminent threat of death and destruction for all Jews in Israel...

So rather than even considering a secular free state; we're forced, by default, to accept the notion of a Jewish state that has an extremely large Arab "minority;" and we're also forced to accept any law, however unjust, that will maintain that "minority" status.

Because how much of a majority truly exists between 6 million Jews and 6 million Arabs; especially if you consider where immigration is almost assuredly going to come from if the law was remotely fair? Hell, even if you take immigration off the table, the birth rate (and death rate) of Arabs as compared to Israelis poses a significant risk in itself to this supposed "majority."

And that's where the crux of the problem lies... and that's why discussing a single vs two-state solution kind of misses the point. This is really one small area of land that we're discussing, not a large massive region that is easily partitioned into two even slices with equal resources and opportunity for growth.

I will never understand how the US and other countries seem to turn a blind eye when it comes to the illegal settlements, other than saying they "condemn" them and they are illegal according to international law. Why not do something, ie stop or drastically shrink aid? And while some countries try to help, they don't have the influence that the US has unfortunately.

Would it be be wrong to say that some parts of their immigration policy is almost Trump like in thinking? Especially the birth right trips for Jewish people as well as always saying that any and all Jewish people are welcomed, but that same privilege isnt available for Palestinians born in Palestine who later leave? I'll also add that my problem isn't that Jewish people have this right, my problem is I want Palestinians who want to go back to have the same privileges, that's all.

100% agreed about how Netanyahu and those working under him use fear mongering to try to either justify or legitimatize their actions in Israel. Even when other tragedies happen, such as in France and Orlando, or San Bernardino, often times Netanyahu or his cabinet will come out and say, we are fighting the same "terrorism" that you are and stand with you, when both circumstances couldn't be any more different.
It's another thing the mainstream media, as well as some politicians(Hilary especially) like to push as well. That the Israelis want peace while the Palestinians don't, and then make it a religious battle when it really isn't.

 

[LennoxLewis]

That should have been "impossible".



Sure, that's possible as well, which would be awful. I was simply mentioning a possible resolution that would still be feasible with the current Israeli actions. And to be honest, that's what I think will eventually happen. Israel will end up giving up all or most of that land in exchange for peace.

I don't believe this honestly, because if it was that simple, I think it would have happened. Plus Israel solely isn't just looking for peace, but so is Palestine. Both sides have done things that disrupt peace in the region.

 

[gourimoko]

I will never understand how the US and other countries seem to turn a blind eye when it comes to the illegal settlements, other than saying they "condemn" them and they are illegal according to international law. Why not do something, ie stop or drastically shrink aid? And while some countries try to help, they don't have the influence that the US has unfortunately.

Would it be be wrong to say that some parts of their immigration policy is almost Trump like in thinking? Especially the birth right trips for Jewish people as well as always saying that any and all Jewish people are welcomed, but that same privilege isnt available for Palestinians born in Palestine who later leave? I'll also add that my problem isn't that Jewish people have this right, my problem is I want Palestinians who want to go back to have the same privileges, that's all.

100% agreed about how Netanyahu and those working under him use fear mongering to try to either justify or legitimatize their actions in Israel. Even when other tragedies happen, such as in France and Orlando, or San Bernardino, often times Netanyahu or his cabinet will come out and say, we are fighting the same "terrorism" that you are and stand with you, when both circumstances couldn't be any more different.
It's another thing the mainstream media, as well as some politicians(Hilary especially) like to push as well. That the Israelis want peace while the Palestinians don't, and then make it a religious battle when it really isn't.

I don't really like discussing AIPAC and Israeli lobbying influence because I don't like where that conversation can go.. I don't like or want to lead people down the path of thinking that Israelis and by extension Zionists and then by further extension Jewish people are somehow fifth columnists working to supplant what would otherwise be popular opinion. I think that's a dangerous line of reasoning so, caution is warranted when discussing the topic.

But with that said, if you removed money from politics in America; then America likely would cease to exist as the sole outlier within the Western democracies on this issue.

There is one particular reason that we as a society decide, democratically, to support an apartheid state; and that's because if any politician called for an end to such support they'd be instantly labelled an anti-semite by both parties and would have ads run against him on repeat.

That reason is lobbying power.... AIPAC has considerable lobbying power in the United States; so much so, that there is near-universal support for Israel in Congress.

Politically speaking; calling out Israel will get you primaried. It's just that simple.

So why on Earth would you ever do it? It's career suicide because of the method by which we select our representation; a method that generally ensures the more well-funded candidate who has the broadest support wins. And if you have a candidate that is being labelled a racist/anti-semite 24/7 on TV, then that candidate is at a marked disadvantage.

They even pulled this shit with Bernie Sanders, a Jew who lived in Israel for years, during the Democratic Presidential Primary. He must be anti-semitic..

Get money out of politics, and you'd solve quite a few of the country (and the world's) problems.

 

[Jordan]

I don't really like discussing AIPAC and Israeli lobbying influence because I don't like where that conversation can go.. I don't like or want to lead people down the path of thinking that Israelis and by extension Zionists and then by further extension Jewish people are somehow fifth columnists working to supplant what would otherwise be popular opinion. I think that's a dangerous line of reasoning so, caution is warranted when discussing the topic.

But with that said, if you removed money from politics in America; then America likely would cease to exist as the sole outlier within the Western democracies on this issue.

There is one particular reason that we as a society decide, democratically, to support an apartheid state; and that's because if any politician called for an end to such support they'd be instantly labelled an anti-semite by both parties and would have ads run against him on repeat.

That reason is lobbying power.... AIPAC has considerable lobbying power in the United States; so much so, that there is near-universal support for Israel in Congress.

Politically speaking; calling out Israel will get you primaried. It's just that simple.

So why on Earth would you ever do it? It's career suicide because of the method by which we select our representation; a method that generally ensures the more well-funded candidate who has the broadest support wins. And if you have a candidate that is being labelled a racist/anti-semite 24/7 on TV, then that candidate is at a marked disadvantage.

They even pulled this shit with Bernie Sanders, a Jew who lived in Israel for years, during the Democratic Presidential Primary. He must be anti-semitic..

Get money out of politics, and you'd solve quite a few of the country (and the world's) problems.

It's not just getting you primaried, the lobby destroys whatever other career you would have by labeling you as an anti-semite. You were a practicing doctor before? No Jew will see you and neither will certain Christians and other groups. Lawyer? Good luck getting a job as an attorney when people think you have a blinding hatred for a large part of American society. Business owner? Good luck getting clientele when they think you're a racist.

With that said, Gour, your point about being weary of discussing AIPAC is very true. THat's my biggest issue with the book The Israel Lobby. They provide brilliant stats and analysis, but there overall conclusion is that zionism and the overall Israel community is evil, well that's just frankly bullshit. They use their data to jump to extreme and flawed logical conclusions. That's a problem.

 

[gourimoko]

It's not just getting you primaried, the lobby destroys whatever other career you would have by labeling you as an anti-semite. You were a practicing doctor before? No Jew will see you and neither will certain Christians and other groups. Lawyer? Good luck getting a job as an attorney when people think you have a blinding hatred for a large part of American society. Business owner? Good luck getting clientele when they think you're a racist.

With that said, Gour, your point about being weary of discussing AIPAC is very true. THat's my biggest issue with the book The Israel Lobby. They provide brilliant stats and analysis, but there overall conclusion is that zionism and the overall Israel community is evil, well that's just frankly bullshit. They use their data to jump to extreme and flawed logical conclusions. That's a problem.

Exactly... It's difficult because both militant Zionists and anti-Semites think you're referring to, or implying, some conscious world-wide Jewish conspiracy and they'll run with it reflexively.

 

[Jordan]

@jking948:




Consider why there had to be agreements in 1967, and again in 1973, if they'd signed one in 1948.

Checkmate!

(edited to add a little dramatic license....)

Haha, well, rather than respond to everything, I do think you have a point here. To be clear, I was viewing our conversation as less of a debate and more of a discussion from where we are coming from. I totally respect your foreign policy realism and maybe you are ultimately accurate.

I would say that there were mass problems for each peace agreement because they did not address the political need of Arab states to emphasize pan-Arab ideals and the disappearance of Israel (I AM NOT SAYING THIS IS IN PAN ARAB PHILOSOPHY. IT'S NOT. IT'S WHAT THE EGYPTIAN AND SYRIAN REGIME PORTRAYED IT AS). And, as I've noted, no true peace agreement can take place until these regimes accept Jews living in their vicinity (now the problem is primarily Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States). By this I mean they would need to accept a portion of Palestinian refugees as citizens. If that does not happen no peace agreement will be successful.

 

[LennoxLewis]

https://www.google.com/amp/www.news...492974?amp=1?client=ms-android-hms-tmobile-us

 

[GreasySpread36]

But.. again, not sure why this would justify the continuation of the occupation?

I would never argue in favor of the occupation. I just have very little confidence that there are enough people on either side who are willing to make the make the sacrifices that a two-state solution would entail.

Now, I do sympathize with the Israelis for ethnic and cultural reasons. But I'm also a nationalist and as such I also sympathize with the maximalist version of Palestinian nationalism. Re: the two-state solution, I have to ask myself: if someone came along and kicked me out of my own home, unjustly, and then years later that same person came around and said, "Hey, tell you what- you can set up a new home in the garage," why would I want to take that deal? After all, the entire house is mine by right.

So no, I can't condone or endorse the occupation, but at the same time if I'm Palestinian I look at a two-state compromise as just a mile marker on the way to the ultimate goal, which is liberation of the whole land from the Jordan to the Med. And if I'm Israeli I pretty much have to assume that's the mentality on the other side. That's what makes this situation so difficult.

 

[kosis]

I appreciate the discussion in this thread... most people know where I stand, and I tend to get frustrated even discussing at this point.

I will say this: While we (along with politicians and lawmakers and UN observers) discuss the solutions and end-game, Israel continues to violate UN charters, continues to violate human rights, and continues to kick Palestinians out of their homes to install settlements.

I think it's a distraction to say Palestinians will want so and so in the future and that they will want to recoup a specific piece of land contingent to a solution, when meanwhile Israel is continuing to move forward with its land grab that is in complete violation to any form of peace. I think we too often treat the current situation as a buffer period of "discussion" when in reality the aggression has never stopped.

Gaza is a disaster. The West Bank is a little better off, but not by much, especially in places like Hebron where children can't walk outside of their homes or use their streets because settlers show up to land that was never theirs to terrorize the local inhabitants. Before we can even talk peace process we have to stop the current aggression and cease all military support, which might be the only action that will stop Netanyahu and that regime.

There is essentially zero reason for Israel to loosen its grip on the Palestinians and stealing land if everything remains status quo while they take part in "peace negotiations". They'll filibuster this thing for decades until all that's left is Israeli land and Palestinian jails.

Great points above as well regarding politicians refusing to support any law or agreement labeled pro-Palestinian in fear of being painted as anti-semitic. Outrageous and crippling. So yeah, the future is very dire.

 

[LennoxLewis]

See I will never understand why the US is so protective of Israel. I know a lot of people say they are an ally in the region, but how much does Israel being an ally really help the US? Especially to allow what happens in Gaza and the West Bank, when over hear the US loves to preach acceptance and being a melting pot.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

I think it's a distraction to say Palestinians will want so and so in the future and that they will want to recoup a specific piece of land contingent to a solution,

Whether or not one party will be willing to abide by the terms of an agreement isn't a "distraction". It's a core issue.

 

[kosis]

Whether or not one party will be willing to abide by the terms of an agreement isn't a "distraction". It's a core issue.

How can there be assumptions and discussions about "terms" when the aggression is currently happening? Bear in mind this is not a war in the modern sense where a side is being asked to surrender. We have charters and policy stating that settlements cannot happen at this moment... and they are happening.