Middle East Conflict

[Homar]

The answer is simple. Hamas needs to say to Israel "We recognise your right to exist unconditionally. We're prepared to establish diplomatic relations with you and will guarantee your security. In return, we ask that you open the borders, help us establish basic services to an acceptable level and work with us to build lasting prosperity for the people living there. We still want a Right of Return but accept that there needs to be a pragmatic solution, with maybe some people able to return and compensation paid to others. We also want an agreement from other countries that Palestinian refugees can have rights of citizenship in those countries if they wish." Then the problem goes away.

Do you actually believe that?!?!

There are Israeli politicians demanding that Israel annexes the entirety of the West Bank. There are Israeli politicians that believe it is justified to kill all Palestinians, including civilians, because this is a “war between two peoples”. There are Israelis that are campaigning for the destruction of the Al-Aqsa mosque. There are fundamentalist Jews that believe it justified to murder non-Jews that live in their “greater Israel”.

I see a lot of criticism of Hamas here, some of it justified, but very little criticism from those same people about Israel’s own politicians, many of which hold equally extreme views. These politicians did not elect themselves. They represent the views of a large number of Israelis that will never accept any homeland for the Palestinians within the borders of a “greater Isreal”. Given the chance they would finish the job and exterminate every last Palestinian.

I’d highly recommend Louis Theroux’s Ultra Zionists documentary, which shows plainly the ideology of those Israeli extremists that represent a significant portion of the electorate. If it were as simple as you believe then this would have been solved long ago. The fact is that there is not a willingness on the Israeli side to give up any inch more than they are forced to (which right now is nothing). The only reason that they withdrew from Gaza was to prevent a “demographic defeat”.

 

[Metal Biker]

Look at the options they have to vote for. Hamas, Fatah, IP, The Third Way. Hardly the cream of the crop considering Fatah has long been in the helm and Hamas in the eyes of the Palestinians was a chance of reform.

And how did you come up with Palestinians approving of Hamas's methods? Did you even check the exit poll results? 80% of Palestinians who voted wanted Hamas to make peace with Israel, to recognise Israel as a state, and to create a unity government to lead reform for peace. Hardly the majority opinion that you insist it to want death. If you think Hamas has absolute influence over Palestinians you are off the mark. A majority of Palestinians, who are more informed on ground level than us speculating a thousand miles away, might finally see hope in turning Hamas into a moderate party. And one of the Palestinian's hopes have already been fulfilled, a Unity government to lead a two state solution.

Edit:

Rather than trying to explain to you and you coming back with your assertions of who Palestinians are (they want destruction of Israel, they voted Hamas because they align with the destruction of Israel), might as well I give you this to read. These are complete results of the election, of Palestinians' opinion of Israel, of their justification to why they voted for Hamas, and other information that you can interpret on your own.

http://www.neareastconsulting.com/plc2006/files/nec-en-pr.pdf

I'm not making assumptions about the Palestinians as a people, just their devotion to Hamas, a group I abhore for their stance on Israel and Jewish people. They want peace with Israel so vote in a group dedicated to eradicating the country and it's people so i'm questioning their incentive. Is it peace at any cost?

It's not about whether they share Hamas's view, they placed in power a group that advocates such an opinion. If the widespread view amongst Palestinians is that Hamas was the best option, it states that 84% supports a peace treaty, yet only 26% voted for Hamas because there was no better option. Sorry, but the numbers do not correlate. If peace with Isreal is the agenda, then form a group that provides that purpose to give the people the option of a less 'aggressive' option. There is a very contrasting atmosphere coming from this poll you provided to suggest that they know they are dissatisfied with Hamas, yet voted for them because the other options were worse, yet the agenda is geared towards peace. Actions speak louder than words and these past 5 years i've not been convinced.

So far i've ignored your little jibes, making your "assumptions" about how I feel about Palestinian people. I'm letting you know now, I don't approve of them and if you continue i'll simple cease speaking to you.

 

[Metal Biker]

The place sounds ghastly. If you are all going to kill yourselves over a bit of land and religion can you do it quietly, with no fuss. Many thanks.

Giving the human race a bad name.

And people wonder why aliens don't talk to us. :/

 

[west didsblue]

That’s not my issue at all and I do not know how you could draw such a conclusion based on what I have said. Again the Israel-apologist tries to equate criticism of Israel with antisemitism. I have said many times here that the Middle East is for all the people of the Middle East. Not just Muslims and not just Arabs. You have seen me defending the rights of Christians to live in Syria. My problem is with the continued ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from their homeland and the ghettoisation of Gaza through policy.

I’ve been as critical of Netanyahu’s government as anyone so I’m hardly an apologist for his actions. I have also been critical of the excessive force used by some IDF troops. Where I differ is that I believe in Israel’s right to exist whereas you don’t. You want the whole of Israel/Palestine to be a single country with a Jewish minority which would inevitably lead to a huge refugee crisis when a significant number of the Arab majority do their best to kill as many Jews as possible in accordance with the Hamas charter. These discussions always end up with arguments about the legitimacy of the state’s existence and as long as it’s like this there’s no point discussing it further.

 

[Metal Biker]

Do you actually believe that?!?!

There are Israeli politicians demanding that Israel annexes the entirety of the West Bank. There are Israeli politicians that believe it is justified to kill all Palestinians, including civilians, because this is a “war between two peoples”. There are Israelis that are campaigning for the destruction of the Al-Aqsa mosque. There are fundamentalist Jews that believe it justified to murder non-Jews that live in their “greater Israel”.

I see a lot of criticism of Hamas here, some of it justified, but very little criticism from those same people about Israel’s own politicians, many of which hold equally extreme views. These politicians did not elect themselves. They represent the views of a large number of Israelis that will never accept any homeland for the Palestinians within the borders of a “greater Isreal”. Given the chance they would finish the job and exterminate every last Palestinian.

I’d highly recommend Louis Theroux’s Ultra Zionists documentary, which shows plainly the ideology of those Israeli extremists that represent a significant portion of the electorate. If it were as simple as you believe then this would have been solved long ago. The fact is that there is not a willingness on the Israeli side to give up any inch more than they are forced to (which right now is nothing). The only reason that they withdrew from Gaza was to prevent a “demographic defeat”.

After 70 years of attempts at exterminating them, their parents and now their children, can you really be surprised at the level of hatred emerging on both sides of this conflict?

We'll drawn a line under it, the Israeli's who want to eliminate Palestinians and Muslims, have probably formed these opinions after years of being targeted. Nevertheless, they are c*nts and their viewpoints are not helpful or will contribute to a lasting peace. The Palestininans who want to eliminate Israel and Jews, have probably formed these opinions after years of being targeted. Nevertheless they are c*nts and their viewpoints are not helpful or will contribute to a lasting peace.

Both sides have REALLY bad eggs. Let's agree upon this and let the debate move forward instead of the constant mudslinging of "yeah but they are worse so their cause is more justified" BS. New ideas are needed.

 

[Ricster]

God some people like to live in the past. Forget all thats gone on, this thread is about now, about gow Israeli soldiers continue to kidnap children, how Israeli soldiers continue to shoot dead and injure unarmed protestors, how the Israeli soldiers are celebrating those kills on video phone.

Too many people on this thread taking the morale high ground and trying to give history lessons to show their dick is bigger.

Fucking innocent children are dying and your discussing wh owns the land or trying to argue about it.

Sickening that people on this thread think that the actions of Israeli soldiers today has anything to do with 1400 years ago!

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Do you actually believe that?!?!

There are Israeli politicians demanding that Israel annexes the entirety of the West Bank. There are Israeli politicians that believe it is justified to kill all Palestinians, including civilians, because this is a “war between two peoples”. There are Israelis that are campaigning for the destruction of the Al-Aqsa mosque. There are fundamentalist Jews that believe it justified to murder non-Jews that live in their “greater Israel”.

I see a lot of criticism of Hamas here, some of it justified, but very little criticism from those same people about Israel’s own politicians, many of which hold equally extreme views. These politicians did not elect themselves. They represent the views of a large number of Israelis that will never accept any homeland for the Palestinians within the borders of a “greater Isreal”. Given the chance they would finish the job and exterminate every last Palestinian.

I’d highly recommend Louis Theroux’s Ultra Zionists documentary, which shows plainly the ideology of those Israeli extremists that represent a significant portion of the electorate. If it were as simple as you believe then this would have been solved long ago. The fact is that there is not a willingness on the Israeli side to give up any inch more than they are forced to (which right now is nothing). The only reason that they withdrew from Gaza was to prevent a “demographic defeat”.

I think it is that simple but it will take a sea-change in attitudes to do it. Gaza is probably a simpler issue than the West Bank but I just can't see Hamas backing down in the medium term.

I'm Jewish. I know full well what some of these religious fundamentalists are like. I've criticised Netanyahu and his increasingly strident right-wing clique on here frequently. One of the problems in Israel is that the PR electoral system gives disproportionate power to the smaller parties in a coalition and many of those smaller parties represent ultra-religious Jews who see Israel as a biblical entity rather than a political one, and the largely ultra-Zionist settler movement. There's some overlap between the two but by and large they're separate groups.

The 4 parties representing the two groups got about 22.5% of the vote in the 2015 election and got 27 seats. Likud got a little bit more and got 30 seats. There are 120 in total so 61 is needed for a majority. One of the right-wing, non-religious parties with 6 seats refused to join the coalition but a more centrist party, Kulanu, with 10, did join thereby giving it 61 seats. So basically Netanyahu is in hock to the religious right. But they're really only interested in the West Bank. Gaza holds no interest for them from an expansionist point of view and they'd be happy to let the Palestinians have it. But at the moment it suits Hamas to be confrontational and negative, a bit like the Unionist parties were in Northern Ireland for a long time.

I've always thought it suspicious in the past that, when there appears to be a chance for some sort of peace, there's a provocation and/or flare-up of violence. I'd say both sides are frightened of taking the steps needed to a peaceful settlement of sorts.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

God some people like to live in the past. Forget all thats gone on, this thread is about now, about gow Israeli soldiers continue to kidnap children, how Israeli soldiers continue to shoot dead and injure unarmed protestors, how the Israeli soldiers are celebrating those kills on video phone.

Too many people on this thread taking the morale high ground and trying to give history lessons to show their dick is bigger.

Fucking innocent children are dying and your discussing wh owns the land or trying to argue about it.

Sickening that people on this thread think that the actions of Israeli soldiers today has anything to do with 1400 years ago!

If you can't see the connection between the history of this region and the things happening today then I'd suggest a thread that's less taxing on your intellect. Everything that happens is bound up in the history and politics since Roman times. That's the whole problem.

 

[cucumberman]

I'm not making assumptions about the Palestinians as a people, just their devotion to Hamas, a group I abhore for their stance on Israel and Jewish people. They want peace with Israel so vote in a group dedicated to eradicating the country and it's people so i'm questioning their incentive. Is it peace at any cost?

It's not about whether they share Hamas's view, they placed in power a group that advocates such an opinion. If the widespread view amongst Palestinians is that Hamas was the best option, it states that 84% supports a peace treaty, yet only 26% voted for Hamas because there was no better option. Sorry, but the numbers do not correlate. If peace with Isreal is the agenda, then form a group that provides that purpose to give the people the option of a less 'aggressive' option. There is a very contrasting atmosphere coming from this poll you provided to suggest that they know they are dissatisfied with Hamas, yet voted for them because the other options were worse, yet the agenda is geared towards peace. Actions speak louder than words and these past 5 years i've not been convinced.

So far i've ignored your little jibes, making your "assumptions" about how I feel about Palestinian people. I'm letting you know now, I don't approve of them and if you continue i'll simple cease speaking to you.

You are making assumptions and suggestions as if it is that easy. You ask them to form a group that provides that purpose to give the people the option of a less aggressive option. Have you ever thought that they already might have tried for many years?

Listen to what you are saying. You are an idealist not a realist. These are people who have been oppressed for decades while you sit in your armchair and say 'look this is what you should be doing'. they need to convince you?

Get a hold of yourself. The world doesn't revolve around your opinions only.

 

[cucumberman]

God some people like to live in the past. Forget all thats gone on, this thread is about now, about gow Israeli soldiers continue to kidnap children, how Israeli soldiers continue to shoot dead and injure unarmed protestors, how the Israeli soldiers are celebrating those kills on video phone.

Too many people on this thread taking the morale high ground and trying to give history lessons to show their dick is bigger.

Fucking innocent children are dying and your discussing wh owns the land or trying to argue about it.

Sickening that people on this thread think that the actions of Israeli soldiers today has anything to do with 1400 years ago!

Spot on Ricster. All this whataboutery about the past is only smoke that muddles the atrocity that is now, it always descend into this.

Every time Israel is criticised for shooting children dead, some have to come and justify why that is the case. I don't know why I even bother posting about history and legitimacy and all this nonsense because these are not reasons why that one shooter decide to pull the trigger and laugh about it all. It's psychopathic behaviour of individuals who are given license to kill.

What it has successfully done in this thread though is it has deflected an argument and made the Israel vs Palestine canon more important that the shooting of children.

 

[Indaparkside]

Spot on Ricster. All this whataboutery about the past is only smoke that muddles the atrocity that is now, it always descend into this.

Every time Israel is criticised for shooting children dead, some have to come and justify why that is the case. I don't know why I even bother posting about history and legitimacy and all this nonsense because these are not reasons why that one shooter decide to pull the trigger and laugh about it all. It's psychopathic behaviour of individuals who are given license to kill.

What it has successfully done in this thread though is it has deflected an argument and made the Israel vs Palestine canon more important that the shooting of children.

The thing is certain posters will post on every topic that's brought up on this forum and they haven't got a fucking clue what there on about half the time

 

[west didsblue]

Spot on Ricster. All this whataboutery about the past is only smoke that muddles the atrocity that is now, it always descend into this.

Every time Israel is criticised for shooting children dead, some have to come and justify why that is the case. I don't know why I even bother posting about history and legitimacy and all this nonsense because these are not reasons why that one shooter decide to pull the trigger and laugh about it all. It's psychopathic behaviour of individuals who are given license to kill.

What it has successfully done in this thread though is it has deflected an argument and made the Israel vs Palestine canon more important that the shooting of children.

Hardly spot on when he makes up stories about children being kidnapped.
Then he complains about discussions about history when it’s Israel’s biggest detractors that tend to start these discussions in an attempt to delegitimise Israel’s existence.

 

[Joe Pineapple]

God some people like to live in the past. Forget all thats gone on, this thread is about now, about gow Israeli soldiers continue to kidnap children, how Israeli soldiers continue to shoot dead and injure unarmed protestors, how the Israeli soldiers are celebrating those kills on video phone.

Too many people on this thread taking the morale high ground and trying to give history lessons to show their dick is bigger.

Fucking innocent children are dying and your discussing wh owns the land or trying to argue about it.

Sickening that people on this thread think that the actions of Israeli soldiers today has anything to do with 1400 years ago!

I've limited sympathy for the dead in this most recent outbreak of mayhem.
Even with the heavily right on reporting it's clear that the Israelis are under fire from sling propelled rocks, molotovs and various other nasties intended to harm, maim and kill.
If the Israelis response was a few mortar platoons, some heavy automatic weapons and even artillery I think it could be termed disproportionate, but they've basically stuck to rifles and pretty restrained use of them too with only 50 dead. They could have easily mowed down the whole mob attacking the border.

 

[The blue phantom]

I've limited sympathy for the dead in this most recent outbreak of mayhem.
Even with the heavily right on reporting it's clear that the Israelis are under fire from sling propelled rocks, molotovs and various other nasties intended to harm, maim and kill.
If the Israelis response was a few mortar platoons, some heavy automatic weapons and even artillery I think it could be termed disproportionate, but they've basically stuck to rifles and pretty restrained use of them too with only 50 dead. They could have easily mowed down the whole mob attacking the border.

Yep. When you look at Israel's casualty figures you can see why they continue with this live fire policy. Those Palestinians must be one hell of a threat attacking that border.

Israel 1 injured Solder.
Palestine 60 dead nearly 3000 injured.

 

[inbetween]

Yep. When you look at Israel's casualty figures you can see why they continue with this live fire policy. Those Palestinians must be one hell of a threat attacking that border.

Israel 1 injured Solder.
Palestine 60 dead nearly 3000 injured.

The Israeli figures show precisely how effective their policy has been. Their sole purpose for using live fire has been to defend the border. Had a violent protest not taken place then there would be no border to defend and hence no need for force.

Take away the ability to use lethal force and it is a fact that the threat still exists and there is a greatly increased potential for a few dead Israeli citizens. From an Israeli point of view is force therefore justified to solely protect Israeli lives?

My guess is you would say no and many on this thread would say no but yet they are happy to remain ignorant and justify Palestinian violence.

When people mention the (unfair?) lack of deaths on one side and then work this into a humanitarian argument it kind of loses its weight....

 

[Vic]

The Jews were there first.
Records dating back to 300 bc.
Ottoman empire invaded in 1577.
Hence the Arab population.

I think someone was there before the Jews.

 

[Metal Biker]

You are making assumptions and suggestions as if it is that easy. You ask them to form a group that provides that purpose to give the people the option of a less aggressive option. Have you ever thought that they already might have tried for many years?

Listen to what you are saying. You are an idealist not a realist. These are people who have been oppressed for decades while you sit in your armchair and say 'look this is what you should be doing'. they need to convince you?

Get a hold of yourself. The world doesn't revolve around your opinions only.

Oh, am I not allowed to do that on a forum? Must I conform to your ideas about how the situation can be resolved?

I guess there's not much point in debating then, if I keep giving the "wrong" responses, is there.

 

[Indaparkside]

I think someone was there before the Jews.

Pep lived forever and will live forever he's god

 

[cucumberman]

Hardly spot on when he makes up stories about children being kidnapped.
Then he complains about discussions about history when it’s Israel’s biggest detractors that tend to start these discussions in an attempt to delegitimise Israel’s existence.

Cant you see that your last sentence is a blanketed attempt to drag people into such discussions in the first place?

I think you are being paranoid. No one in this thread has so far attempted to delegetimise Israel’s existence. More of holding its PM and whoever around his circle accountable and delegtimise their methods. Everyone in the thread was commenting on the atrocities of children being shot at, yet the thread has gone pedantic with discussion along the lines of ‘yes its wrong to shoot at children, but....’. Cant fault them for responding to this as people are so incensed that some would deprioritise the issue of sniping children to talk about issues that no one other than executive members of both parties thousand miles from us are privy to.

Cannot people just go ‘yes its wrong to shoot at children, what were they thinking?’.

Now, on to the discussion at hand. Treatment of children.

Since 2000, at least 8000 children have been detained a majority of which spirited away without their parents being informed. The amendment stipulates that parents must be immediately informed upon detaining but with the loopholes in the amendment these are largely not practised. It can be argued that kidnapping and detaining without informing the parents is not the same, but these are all just semantics. As a parent I consider both the same and the trauma to be the same.

Also, the amendment states that the children are right to an attorney, however the catch is the child must himself state which particular attorney to contact. Thus, making this clause useless.

www.dci-palestine.org/children_in_israeli_detention


An 8 month old baby died 3 days ago as one of the Palestinians who died. If you had the chance to meet the mother while she held the baby in her arms, would you express your sympathy but also backhanded it with a “but....you know...cant fault them...you got your comeuppance” ?

 

[cucumberman]

I’ve been as critical of Netanyahu’s government as anyone so I’m hardly an apologist for his actions. I have also been critical of the excessive force used by some IDF troops. Where I differ is that I believe in Israel’s right to exist whereas you don’t. You want the whole of Israel/Palestine to be a single country with a Jewish minority which would inevitably lead to a huge refugee crisis when a significant number of the Arab majority do their best to kill as many Jews as possible in accordance with the Hamas charter. These discussions always end up with arguments about the legitimacy of the state’s existence and as long as it’s like this there’s no point discussing it further.

He’s posted twice (Homer) and in both instances I cant see where youve drawn to the conclusion that he believe Israel has no right to exist. im certain others neutral to this issue would find his posts to not even near implying that as well.