Israel Thread

Reactions
299 37 13
#1
I figured a slightly less-than-biased thread title might be a good idea on this one. I searched, and what existed... wasn't. Consider this thread an omnibus for the topic if you wish.


Starting out with current events, so everybody here has probably heard about the UN Security Council resolution on Israel recently. Everything beyond 1967 is a violation of international law, etc. Interesting opinion piece on that topic in the Jerusalem Post: Obama’s role in the passage of UNSC Resolution 2334: Fake news or spin?

What's most interesting about this piece is the author. To spoil it: the former Ambassador to Israel from Canada. I didn't know that clicking on the piece.

Interesting points raised about the chain of events there. Basically, it looks like the USA engineered the resolution, or at least that's the accusation.
 
Reactions
1,233 539 31
#2
I'm Jewish and pro-Israel in the sense that I believe Israel has a right to exist. If you can't accept that it is a country and has the right to defend itself against people trying to destroy it, then we'll never see eye to eye.

However, I also see the Palestinians have their own land, and regardless about whose land it should be, it is for all intents and purposes, theirs. As long as Israel supports people going into Palestinian villages, kicks people out of their homes, and moves in, Israel can not claim it is acting in good faith with regards to a peaceful resolution.
 
Reactions
864 255 0
#5
I concur with what has been said.

Except for the part about being Jewish.
 
Reactions
137 18 1
#6
I too concur. I'm not Jewish either, but I'm told I look like I am.
 
Reactions
423 230 1
#7
Pretty much for me it comes down to "I don't like this resettlement business, but beyond that, I know next to nothing about the history surrounding this issue, religious or otherwise, so I'ma keep my ass out of this."
 
Reactions
299 37 13
#8
However, I also see the Palestinians have their own land, and regardless about whose land it should be, it is for all intents and purposes, theirs. As long as Israel supports people going into Palestinian villages, kicks people out of their homes, and moves in, Israel can not claim it is acting in good faith with regards to a peaceful resolution.
I would say that's an overly-simplistic view of what most "settlement" is. The vast majority of the time (from what I can tell) it is setting up dwellings anywhere that is beyond that 1967 line, and most (all?) of the time that's new buildings, and most of the time on things that may have been classed as farmland (though if you look at before images, often nothing's been growing for... ever?). So while I can appreciate the idea that people say they're losing their land (which is true), it's not the same as purging a town and setting up shop in the same place, which it often is portrayed as.

Also one must keep in mind that said line goes through Jerusalem and a number of other large and significant places, and was a war armistice line, not something making more geographic sense in most cases.

And lastly, remember that the "acceptable line" for most (or many, or few, depending on who you believe) inside those territories is the Mediterranean Sea. As in, destruction of Israel entirely. So this is kind of a shell game as it is for large segments of their population (Hamas) who have their stated goal as the destruction of Israel entirely. And for the record, IMO any "right of return" is functionally equivalent to "the destruction of Israel" as well.

This is not an excuse that everything done by Israel on any post-1967 lands is fine, but it doesn't mean anything done there is by definition bad either IMO.
 
Reactions
662 88 11
#9
it's not the same as purging a town and setting up shop in the same place, which it often is portrayed as.
Where is that the way it's often portrait?

Look the settlements, no matter where they put them, are a clear sign that the government doesn't want a 2 state solution, despite what they say.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
Reactions
7,127 1,496 27
#12
I've said this before - I'm of the opinion that Palestine ceased to exist as a legitimate sovereign body when Arafat walked away from the Camp David accords despite being given everything he asked for in the agreement save the one condition that it be acknowledged that Israel has the right to exist - a position furthered by their embracing of Hamas as their governing body. It's long past time for the so-called "Palestinians" to either assimilate into Israeli society (as many have) or move elsewhere - but in either case recognize that "Palestine" no longer exists as a place or an identity. Their plight over the last 50 years has largely been prolonged and exacerbated by the surrounding Arab nations who refused to take in refugees during the conflicts because they were more useful being permanently disaffected so as to have no choice but to continue to wage a thinly veiled proxy war against Israel. Israel is our one true ally and our first bulwark against the spread of the archaic barbarism endemic to the middle east, and should be afforded every measure of support we can give. How our government has treated Israel over the last 8 years has been revolting.
 
Reactions
662 88 11
#13
Israel is our one true ally and our first bulwark against the spread of the archaic barbarism endemic to the middle east, and should be afforded every measure of support we can give.
Ah yes, if Israel wasn't there the middle easterners would just all invade the west... maybe in boats or something.

But hey, blindly supporting a regime has never ended badly...


I've said this before - I'm of the opinion that Palestine ceased to exist as a legitimate sovereign body when Arafat walked away from the Camp David accords despite being given everything he asked for in the agreement save the one condition that it be acknowledged that Israel has the right to exist - a position furthered by their embracing of Hamas as their governing body.
Well i'm glad you agree that if the population of a place has horrible ideas it's ok for someone else to take their land... i assume y'all will surrender peacefully to Canada on the 20th, right.


It's long past time for the so-called "Palestinians" to either assimilate into Israeli society (as many have)
Well your opinions did soften a lot over the years, but i didn't expect you to actually advocate multiculturalism so fervently.
 
Reactions
1,233 539 31
#14
It's long past time for the so-called "Palestinians" to either assimilate into Israeli society
The issue with that is that if every single Palestinian said "this isn't our land. We're Israeli citizens now" the right wing of the country (Bibi's party) would not be ok with that since Jews would be a minority. Its the issue of having a country that was founded for one specific religious group, but also allows religious freedom.
 
Reactions
333 64 1
#15
It's long past time for the so-called "Palestinians" to either assimilate into Israeli society
The problem there is the possibility of "Palestinians" outnumbering Isreali Jews. And Isreal does NOT want its Jewish population to be outnumbered by Arabs in their own country.

Edit: ninjaed by @blotsfan
 
Reactions
299 37 13
#19
I think this article is great because while I agree with some of it, I do NOT agree with a lot of it either: I am an Israeli Citizen
Israel will negotiate with Palestine their borders, which will be open. Israeli security will be from the river to the sea. Palestine will not bear arms. These are non-negotiable conditions. Bush and Obama accepted them as such. Even if they did not do so, as a sovereign state, we demand these security precautions. Without them, there will be no Palestine.
Basically, anytime you say to another state "you're a state, but we're your police force" they're not their own state. I understand why somebody in Israel may see that as essential, but that's just not a thing.Doesn't he remember how "well" (not well at all) the occupation of southern Lebanon went for decades? It was better after they left.
I'm sure others here can find lots they agree or disagree with as well.
 
Reactions
662 88 11
#20
What i don't get is what are the Israelis afraid off? They already kicked everyone's ass in the region, and getting a piece of paper that says Palestine recognizes their right to exist won't matter at all if the arabs are actually ever in a position to wipe them out.

Just give them their shitty land, and just influence them with your culture and economy, like the Americans do.

I mean the Irish language survived 800 years of British attempts at stamping it out, only for it to shrink to almost nothing in less then 100 after the Irish where no longer being forced to renounce it. Of course the leaders that signed the treaty for peace where planning to do that for Northern Ireland, but half the population revolted instead and they had a civil war that killed more people then the revolt against the British... so NI is still in the UK now... so i guess that's more of a hard sell to the idiots on your side, no matter how effective.
 
Reactions
35 7 0
#22
I've said this before - I'm of the opinion that Palestine ceased to exist as a legitimate sovereign body when Arafat walked away from the Camp David accords despite being given everything he asked for in the agreement save the one condition that it be acknowledged that Israel has the right to exist
Not given quite everything they asked for, but like 90% of everything they asked for. The Palestinians saw the generous Israeli offer as a sign of weakness, and thought they could get more. A negotiating tactic, and one that ultimately failed with the coming into power of Sharon's administration in Israel, which was initially much less inclined to make such concessions.
 
Last edited:
Reactions
662 88 11
#23
Last thing before bed, from Canada of all places: Why would anyone ever think the Palestinians would accept a two-state solution?

His text describes in more detail what Gas referred to above about them getting everything they (say they) want in 2000, and refusing.
I believe my previous post was meant to imply that they don't really need to give a shit about what the Palestinians really want. It's not like any of the other Arab states around them wouldn't jump at the chance to make Israel not be a country anymore.
 
Reactions
299 37 13
#25
Story from Canada: B.C. woodworking school rejects — then un-rejects — Israeli student because of ‘illegal settlement activity’

Basically, the guy's from Israel, so they rejected him. Media started paying attention, so they un-reject him. He tells them that he's not interested in the school anymore (for obvious reasons).

And it was probably illegal!
In either case, the Island School of Building Arts policy likely violated Canadian law. Under the B.C. Human Rights Code, for one, businesses are prohibited from discriminating based on “place of origin.”
 
Reactions
299 37 13
#27
Hamas no longer calls for the active destruction of Israel, but still refuses to acknowledge it has a right to exist:
Reuters Story
Haaretz Story
Reuters said:
The Palestinian Islamist group Hamas on Monday dropped its longstanding call for Israel's destruction, but said it still rejected the country's right to exist and backs "armed struggle" against it.

In a policy document presented in Doha by its leader Khaled Meshaal, Hamas also said it would end its association with the Muslim Brotherhood, a move apparently aimed at improving ties with Gulf Arab states and Egypt, which view the Brotherhood as a terrorist group.
The difference in position between 'advocating for Israel's destruction' and 'still rejected the country's right to exist and backs "armed struggle" against it' seems pretty damned minute, especially given the ambiguity:
Reuters said:
It remained unclear whether the document replaces Hamas's 1988 charter, which calls for Israel’s destruction
So same old, same old. LOOK like you're doing something, but actually business as usual.
 
Reactions
299 37 13
#28
Israel Ambassador to the UN gives a speech for the Security Council:
He basically says "when the Palestinian Authority stops paying $3000USD per month to the families of those who are terrorists, that will help a lot."

I wondered about the $3000/month thing, and it appears "fairly true" from googling: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_Authority_Martyrs_Fund
Families of terrorists killed by Israeli security forces while they are murdering Israelis are paid stipends of about $800 to $1,000 per month. The families of convicted terrorists serving time in Israeli prisons receive $3,000 or higher per month.[16][12] According to Yossi Kuperwasser of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, in 2017 the Palestinian Authority was paying out $300 million annually in terrorism stipends, which tallies to about 7 percent of the Authority's annual budget, and to more than 20% of the total foreign aid donations given to the Authority by all governments.[16]

...

In June, 2017, Palestinian Authority President Mahmood Abbas called efforts to stop the martyr payments an "aggression against the Palestinian people," and defended the salaries paid to to imprisoned Palestinians as a "social responsibility."[22]
There's more in the Wikipedia article than that of course, but that's the shortest part that still makes sense quoted.
 
Reactions
299 37 13
#30
Wasn't sure where to put this one, Trump thread or here, but I think here is slightly more appropriate, as while the comments go beyond Israel, the ones getting the biggest headlines are regarding Israel: Kushner On Middle East Peace: "What Do We Offer That's Unique? I Don't Know."
And again, all these people make arguments about why they feel the way they do. So as tensions were really mounting, I don't know if everyone is familiar, but there were two people—two Israeli guards killed at the Temple Mount (and that's the first time in many, many, many years that that happened, so Israelis [unintelligible] putting up metal detectors on the Temple Mount, which is not an irrational thing to do. You know when you have—police officers were just killed, and weapons that were used to [unintelligible] the weapons to check them—so then what happens is they start inciting it.

They say look, you know, this is a change to the status quo. The Temple Mount is a [unintelligible] occupation of Israel, and Israel was saying we don’t want anything to do with that, we just want to make sure people are safe. And that really incited a lot of tension in the streets.

So we're going to work with them [unintelligible] to take down the metal detectors there, and then I think one of the Palestinians' religious leaders was saying, “If you go through the metal detectors, then your prayers don’t count.” And that is not a very helpful thing to have said. And then there was a lot of rage. And there was an Israeli family that three people killed in their home, which was absolutely terrible. You know, so, "I'm going to do this to free the Temple Mount." So ultimately we were able to work with them, and we were able to get the Israelis to take down to the different forms of surveillance that the Jordanians were OK with, and we talked with the Palestinians the whole time to try to get their viewpoint on it.

And then ultimately they said, "OK, we took down the metal detectors but there's still a bridge up somewhere." And they said, "OK, we'll take that down, too." And so Bibi was getting beaten up by the press in Israel, because that was very politically unpopular for him to do. At the same time we got a situation in Jordan where an Israeli security diplomat in Jordan was attacked by two Jordanian men, and in self-defense he killed the attackers. So then it worked out where the Jordanians got the Israelis to accept their people from the embassy back to Israel
Full audio: Full Audio of Jared Kushner's Remarks to Congressional Interns

The text excerpts I read seem rather reasonable statements. Not super-insightful, but not collections of flaming bullshit either. I have not listened to the full audio.
X
 
Reactions
681 255 4
#34
I'm gonna guess that they edited the article since you read it last, because, from the article:

The full list of abstaining countries was: Antigua-Barbuda, Argentina, Australia, the Bahamas, Benin, Bhutan, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Cameroon, Canada, Colombia, Croatia, Czech Republic, Dominican Republic, Equatorial Guinea, Fiji, Haiti, Hungary, Jamaica, Kiribati, Latvia, Lesotho, Malawi, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, the Philippines, Poland, Romania, Rwanda, the Solomon Islands, South Sudan, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, Uganda and Vanuatu.
[DOUBLEPOST=1513880419,1513880244][/DOUBLEPOST]Also, Nay

The countries that voted with the United States against the resolution condemning its embassy move were Togo, Palau, the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Honduras, Guatemala and Israel.
And Yay

The United Kingdom, France, Germany, Ireland, Belgium, Portugal, Spain and China all voted to condemn the move of the American embassy as part of a total of 128 countries voting in favour of the resolution.
 
Reactions
681 255 4
#35
I wanna say, I'm rather surprised that Argentina abstained. I'm curious about their reasons for not wanting to piss off America
 
Top