Palestine & israel? What do you think about that situation?

[tins]

Classic ethnic cleansing.  Crime against humanity.  As as a tax-paying American it sucks that it is on my dime since we have a high population of well situated treasonous scumbags here.

...and that we fund trillion dollar wars...

...for israel

No...for oil...

[Falconer]

Classic ethnic cleansing.  Crime against humanity.  As as a tax-paying American it sucks that it is on my dime since we have a high population of well situated treasonous scumbags here.

...and that we fund trillion dollar wars...

...for israel

No...for oil...

for spying middle east countries

[tins]

Classic ethnic cleansing.  Crime against humanity.  As as a tax-paying American it sucks that it is on my dime since we have a high population of well situated treasonous scumbags here.

...and that we fund trillion dollar wars...

...for israel

No...for oil...

for spying middle east countries

Right, also preventing more terrorist attacks.

[Falconer]

Classic ethnic cleansing.  Crime against humanity.  As as a tax-paying American it sucks that it is on my dime since we have a high population of well situated treasonous scumbags here.

...and that we fund trillion dollar wars...

...for israel

No...for oil...

for spying middle east countries

Right, also preventing more terrorist attacks.

and maybe make the terrorist attacks by themselves.

[J. J. Phillips]

Wait, is this thread still going? I thought we resolved everything.

There are really three distinct questions.

1. What happened in the past?

2. What is happening now?

3. What are possible futures?

It's clear that the two "sides" have very different narratives as answers to Question 1. It seems to me that it would help if both narratives were well understood. On the other hand, I'm open to the possibility that a peaceful solution is more likely if people just stopped talking about the past. For example, I find it terrible how little attention the Armenian Genocide (committed by Turkey) gets. But it's possible the world is more peaceful today because most people pretend it didn't happen.

The two "sides" also have very different answers to Question 2. This is largely a question of focus. If someone is pro-Palestinian, then they focus on checkpoints, prisoners, settlements and pictures of dead Palestinian kids. If someone is pro-Israel, they focus on suicide bombings, rocket attacks and hostages. If someone is anti-Palestinian, they focus on videos showing Palestinian kids in schools learning to hate Jews and performing in plays pretending to behead Jews. If someone is anti-Israel, they focus on Israeli kids playing with toy guns. It's not that all of these things aren't happening. It's just that if you are on one side then you make sure to focus on the parts that are favorable to the side you favor.

Regarding Question 3. The most likely outcome I can see is 6 million dead Jews, followed by celebrations around the world (including by many of you), followed by an army of nano-robots attacking the human reproductive system. Another outcome might be a two state solution. A two state solution seems like it would require so many things to change (including some fundamental cultural changes for the Palestinians) that it's hard for me to imagine. I'm certainly not convinced that Israel is taking actions that make this outcome "less likely" -- but with the goal so far away and the terrain so complicated it's hard to tell which direction leads towards it and which direction leads away from it.

(Actually, I'm not really sure the phrase "2 state solution" is appropriate. The territory was part of "Transjordan" after WW1 when the British took over. It included what is now Jordan. Jordan is a state with a lot of Palestinians. It seems like Israel-Palestine-Jordan would be a "3 state solution," but whatever.)

Let's suppose a "2 state solution" is the most desirable outcome. To be clear, this means agreed-upon borders and an end to hostilities. (Yes, I know, stop laughing.) Is such a "2 state solution" more likely if people stop trying to answer Questions 1 and 2? Especially regarding Question 1, it should be clear that there will never be agreement about what happened.

[J. J. Phillips]

...

Right, also preventing more terrorist attacks.

and maybe make the terrorist attacks by themselves.

It helps to understand that a large portion of the pro-Palestinian side believe that, for example, the attacks of September 11 were committed by Jews and/or Zionists and/or parts of the U.S. Government. But definitely not Muslims, because Islam means peace and stuff.

They're literally living in a different reality, so it's not surprising they come to different conclusions.

[u9y42]

Second, it isn't Israel's land-...on what are you basing the assertion that it is?

That it belongs to them.

Come on tins; you have to be reasonable: the land doesn't belong to Israel merely on your say so. I've already provided the sources on which I'm basing my opinion - if you can't do the same, then that's just dogma.

Wait, is this thread still going? I thought we resolved everything.

[...]

Ah, J. J. Phillips, I'm glad you're back in this thread. I think you might have missed my reply on the previous page: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1012231.msg11255554#msg11255554; in it, I answered your requests for sources and background information, and commented on the rest of your post in some detail - by the way, let me apologize in advance for the great wall of text.

Also, the previous post, for which, at the time, you didn't have the opportunity to answer in full, is now back at page 6; here's the link to the post, if you want to take a look at it again: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1012231.msg11065074#msg11065074 - I touched upon, and somewhat expanded a few of the same points in my latest reply though, so feel free to merge those, if you will.

[jaysabi]

In my view, a better approach, for you as a "selfish tax payer", would be to move the US to put pressure on Israel to prevent it stalling negotiations and avoiding a peace agreement that would allow a viable Palestinian state to emerge - the rest are temporary measures at best, or harmful at worst.




By the way, jaysabi, thanks for mentioning the book "On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society" in a previous post - I actually didn't imagine firing rates were that low initially, and the length the soldiers would go to avoid killing others. I'll have to take a better look at that.

Just responding to these two short notes in another good post by you. I also agree that this is the best approach for me as a "selfish tax payer." However, following this road is nearly guaranteed political suicide in the US, so it almost seems futile to try to pursue it. Being critical of Israeli policy opens you to a charge of being anti-Semitic, 'betraying an important ally,' or any other serious political crimes that a political challenger would be all too eager to use against you for their own political gain. It's unfortunate because as Israel's largest enabler, I believe we have a responsibility to hold Israel responsible for human rights violations. (Given our own track record, the case would ring hollow though.) Despite being the dominant military force in the area, Israel is still viewed as the underdog, and undercutting them inspires great anger from US citizens.

The book On Killing is really great. I can't recommend it enough. It's one of the most important books I've ever read considering the topic it deals with and how the military systematically extinguishes the natural instinct not to kill, and how important understanding desensitization is for our civilization in this era where violence can be inflicted on large numbers by so few and with such ease.

[tins]

Classic ethnic cleansing.  Crime against humanity.  As as a tax-paying American it sucks that it is on my dime since we have a high population of well situated treasonous scumbags here.

...and that we fund trillion dollar wars...

...for israel

No...for oil...

for spying middle east countries

Right, also preventing more terrorist attacks.

and maybe make the terrorist attacks by themselves.

Islamic terrorist attacks.
Hopefully, one day they will not be commonplace...we can hope.
-Obama

[tins]

the land doesn't belong to Israel.

Yes it does. They were attacked and beat their attackers and took the spoils of war.
c'est la vie...

[Falconer]

the land doesn't belong to Israel.

Yes it does. They were attacked and beat their attackers and took the spoils of war.
c'est la vie...

I was amazed how Israel have the best force to defense their country, but how can they use the power to kill woman and children. Israel is beautiful country, and can be more beautiful if they can make a peace with Palestina and other middle east countries. I remember there is a popular graffiti that was made by Banksy at Gaza, let's take it look http://www.theguardian.com/arts/pictures/0,,1543331,00.html

[tins]

I was amazed how Israel have the best force to defense their country...

I agree, I'm still amazed how well they defend their country with the billions of muslims in the middle east trying to wipe them off the map.
Kudos to Israel...well done.

[J. J. Phillips]

Wait, is this thread still going? I thought we resolved everything.

[...]

Ah, J. J. Phillips, I'm glad you're back in this thread. I think you might have missed my reply on the previous page: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1012231.msg11255554#msg11255554; in it, I answered your requests for sources and background information, and commented on the rest of your post in some detail - by the way, let me apologize in advance for the great wall of text.

Also, the previous post, for which, at the time, you didn't have the opportunity to answer in full, is now back at page 6; here's the link to the post, if you want to take a look at it again: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1012231.msg11065074#msg11065074 - I touched upon, and somewhat expanded a few of the same points in my latest reply though, so feel free to merge those, if you will.

I saw your post(s) but haven't finished reading it yet. Thanks for the effort you put into writing them. I will simply have to wait until I have enough free time to devote to them before responding.

PS: I now recognize Vatican City as land rightfully belonging to Palestinians and will fully support those who apply all means available to return that land to its rightful owners.

[J. J. Phillips]

the land doesn't belong to Israel.

Yes it does. They were attacked and beat their attackers and took the spoils of war.
c'est la vie...

There is a related question I've brought up more than once:

Is Breslau occupied by the Poles?

There are consequences to losing wars.

But I do think I understand the position of many of those who say that the "West Bank" is Palestinian land occupied by Israel but Breslau is not German land occupied by Poland. Many people believe in some concept of "international law" which means that these kinds of questions are answered by certain "international bodies" (often offshoots of the United Nations). So the West Bank is occupied because certain "international bodies" say so, and Breslau isn't occupied because there aren't "international bodies" who say it is. I find this to be a scary way to look at the world, outsourcing one's judgement to "international bodies" -- but many people find it more comfortable than thinking things through for themselves.

[u9y42]

Just responding to these two short notes in another good post by you. I also agree that this is the best approach for me as a "selfish tax payer." However, following this road is nearly guaranteed political suicide in the US, so it almost seems futile to try to pursue it. Being critical of Israeli policy opens you to a charge of being anti-Semitic, 'betraying an important ally,' or any other serious political crimes that a political challenger would be all too eager to use against you for their own political gain. It's unfortunate because as Israel's largest enabler, I believe we have a responsibility to hold Israel responsible for human rights violations. (Given our own track record, the case would ring hollow though.) Despite being the dominant military force in the area, Israel is still viewed as the underdog, and undercutting them inspires great anger from US citizens.

For the time being at least, I'm afraid you're right. But, I believe that is changing: younger and even college aged students, who are far less influenced by the traditional media and have greater access to information, aren't as caught up in that whole narrative, I think. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, there have been quite a few groups, and perhaps even a couple of university campus, joining the Boycott, Sanctions and Divestment movement, for example. That's one of the reasons I think Israel's attempts at derailing the peace process are so self-destructive: there is no way that, the longer this mess continues, the support Israel receives won't continue to wane, until it reaches the point that they are completely isolated in the international community - same as it did for South Africa, or Indonesia, before them.

The book On Killing is really great. I can't recommend it enough. It's one of the most important books I've ever read considering the topic it deals with and how the military systematically extinguishes the natural instinct not to kill, and how important understanding desensitization is for our civilization in this era where violence can be inflicted on large numbers by so few and with such ease.

It's on my to-read list. Somewhat unrelated but, there was a three part interview The Real News did with David Swanson some time ago, that I think you might like (well, at least I did ):

"Lies and War - David Swanson on Reality Asserts Itself"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzwaSbWD8C0 - "On RAI with Paul Jay, David Swanson, author of "War is a Lie", talks about becoming a full time activist for peace"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BM5qIvVLGg0 - "On RAI, Paul Jay and David Swanson discuss the culture and economics of war"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIcOdilpXUU - "On RAI with Paul Jay, David Swanson says that nonviolent campaigns have been more successful than campaigns of violence"

I particularly liked the idea they explore in the second video: that war is, in a sense, a "cultural invention", or that at the very least, the culture of a society has a great deal of influence in either promoting or rejecting the practice of war - as opposed to, war simply being just a part of human nature, and fundamentally unavoidable; or mainly economic/resource driven; or perhaps due to the way societies are structured and who has power in them.

The whole thing is a bit long though: about an hour.

the land doesn't belong to Israel.

Yes it does. They were attacked and beat their attackers and took the spoils of war.
c'est la vie...

There is a related question I've brought up more than once:

Is Breslau occupied by the Poles?

There are consequences to losing wars.

But I do think I understand the position of many of those who say that the "West Bank" is Palestinian land occupied by Israel but Breslau is not German land occupied by Poland. Many people believe in some concept of "international law" which means that these kinds of questions are answered by certain "international bodies" (often offshoots of the United Nations). So the West Bank is occupied because certain "international bodies" say so, and Breslau isn't occupied because there aren't "international bodies" who say it is. I find this to be a scary way to look at the world, outsourcing one's judgement to "international bodies" -- but many people find it more comfortable than thinking things through for themselves.

Actually, as I've pointed out to tins (though he completely ignored it), Israel's own Supreme Court considers the occupied territories to be just that: occupied - as in, not a part of Israel, but under temporary occupation, pending some sort of negotiated agreement (an agreement that, as I've mentioned on several posts so far, Israel blocks). This is a position that the Supreme Court of Israel has consistently held since 1967. And in fact, when caught in related cases in the Supreme Court, even the Israeli government argues on the basis that it is an occupying power - as an example, when the government acted out the unilateral disengagement from Gaza, and was challenged by settlers in the Supreme Court, it used, and won the case with the argument that the settlements are only meant to be temporary (on the basis that it is supposed to be a temporary occupation, and that it is an occupying power).

Wait, is this thread still going? I thought we resolved everything.

[...]

Ah, J. J. Phillips, I'm glad you're back in this thread. I think you might have missed my reply on the previous page: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1012231.msg11255554#msg11255554; in it, I answered your requests for sources and background information, and commented on the rest of your post in some detail - by the way, let me apologize in advance for the great wall of text.

Also, the previous post, for which, at the time, you didn't have the opportunity to answer in full, is now back at page 6; here's the link to the post, if you want to take a look at it again: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1012231.msg11065074#msg11065074 - I touched upon, and somewhat expanded a few of the same points in my latest reply though, so feel free to merge those, if you will.

I saw your post(s) but haven't finished reading it yet. Thanks for the effort you put into writing them. I will simply have to wait until I have enough free time to devote to them before responding.

PS: I now recognize Vatican City as land rightfully belonging to Palestinians and will fully support those who apply all means available to return that land to its rightful owners.

Oh, good; I was worried you might have missed them, when I saw "[you] thought we resolved everything" - but that being the case, then I look forward to reading your reply to those posts.

[tins]

the land doesn't belong to Israel.

Yes it does. They were attacked and beat their attackers and took the spoils of war.
c'est la vie...

There is a related question I've brought up more than once:

Is Breslau occupied by the Poles?

There are consequences to losing wars.

But I do think I understand the position of many of those who say that the "West Bank" is Palestinian land occupied by Israel but Breslau is not German land occupied by Poland. Many people believe in some concept of "international law" which means that these kinds of questions are answered by certain "international bodies" (often offshoots of the United Nations). So the West Bank is occupied because certain "international bodies" say so, and Breslau isn't occupied because there aren't "international bodies" who say it is. I find this to be a scary way to look at the world, outsourcing one's judgement to "international bodies" -- but many people find it more comfortable than thinking things through for themselves.

Excellent point. I concede, all off Israel (West Bank included) rightfully belongs to Israel. Should Israel choose to give any of it to the Egyptians, Jordanians, or "Palistinians" AGAIN, for peace- that is Israel's right to do so, but not their obligation in any way.

Side point- you have the most well researched, articulate points posted throughout this thread. I would put money down that you're a history professor. Keep it up. I enjoy your elegant and factual posts.
 

[bryant.coleman]

I was amazed how Israel have the best force to defense their country...

I agree, I'm still amazed how well they defend their country with the billions of muslims in the middle east trying to wipe them off the map.
Kudos to Israel...well done.

A combination of facts have helped their survival. The most important ones are:

1. During the first war (1948), a majority of the Israeli soldiers were highly experienced individuals, having served in the armed forces of various European nations. On the other hand, the Arabs hardly had any combat experience.

2. Both the United Nations and the European nations helped Israel, while the Arabs received only mild support from the USSR.

3. Israeli weapons were technically much superior to those the Arabs had.

4. During the wars of 1948, 1967, and 1973, the Israelis were united against the common enemy, while the Arabs failed to put behind their differences.

5. The Israelis are fighting for their survival, while a majority of the Arabs are fighting for more land.

[jaysabi]

the land doesn't belong to Israel.

Yes it does. They were attacked and beat their attackers and took the spoils of war.
c'est la vie...

There is a related question I've brought up more than once:

Is Breslau occupied by the Poles?

There are consequences to losing wars.

But I do think I understand the position of many of those who say that the "West Bank" is Palestinian land occupied by Israel but Breslau is not German land occupied by Poland. Many people believe in some concept of "international law" which means that these kinds of questions are answered by certain "international bodies" (often offshoots of the United Nations). So the West Bank is occupied because certain "international bodies" say so, and Breslau isn't occupied because there aren't "international bodies" who say it is. I find this to be a scary way to look at the world, outsourcing one's judgement to "international bodies" -- but many people find it more comfortable than thinking things through for themselves.

I don't know enough about Breslau to have a qualified opinion. What are the circumstances that would lead you to question its status as occupied or not? Does Germany contest the land? Does the civilian population express a German identity rather than Polish?

[jaysabi]

The book On Killing is really great. I can't recommend it enough. It's one of the most important books I've ever read considering the topic it deals with and how the military systematically extinguishes the natural instinct not to kill, and how important understanding desensitization is for our civilization in this era where violence can be inflicted on large numbers by so few and with such ease.

It's on my to-read list. Somewhat unrelated but, there was a three part interview The Real News did with David Swanson some time ago, that I think you might like (well, at least I did ):

"Lies and War - David Swanson on Reality Asserts Itself"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzwaSbWD8C0 - "On RAI with Paul Jay, David Swanson, author of "War is a Lie", talks about becoming a full time activist for peace"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BM5qIvVLGg0 - "On RAI, Paul Jay and David Swanson discuss the culture and economics of war"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIcOdilpXUU - "On RAI with Paul Jay, David Swanson says that nonviolent campaigns have been more successful than campaigns of violence"

I particularly liked the idea they explore in the second video: that war is, in a sense, a "cultural invention", or that at the very least, the culture of a society has a great deal of influence in either promoting or rejecting the practice of war - as opposed to, war simply being just a part of human nature, and fundamentally unavoidable; or mainly economic/resource driven; or perhaps due to the way societies are structured and who has power in them.

The whole thing is a bit long though: about an hour.

Thanks for this. I will look into it when I have an hour to watch.

[bryant.coleman]

Apparently not. It's Poland's 4th biggest city, it doesn't have a significant German minority and people living there have no interest in becoming a part of Germany.

As per the 1900 Census, German was the native language of 98.7% of the population there. In 1945, Wrocław (Breslau) had a population of 210,000, of which 190,000 were ethnic German (90%). Poles constituted for less than 10% of the total population. After Germany was defeated in the WW2, the ethnic Germans of Breslau and other cities of Niederschlesien were expelled west-wards, to be replaced with ethnic Polish migrants from the East.