DreamTheaterForums.org Dream Theater Fan Site
General => Archive => Political and Religious => Topic started by: Super Dude on February 02, 2011, 08:27:08 AM
-
I thought this would be a more neutral, much healthier form under which to discuss any goings on in the region. That said, amazing article from a Mr. Friedman of the NYT:
https://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/02/opinion/02friedman.html?_r=1
B.E., Before Egypt. A.E., After Egypt.
I’m meeting a retired Israeli general at a Tel Aviv hotel. As I take my seat, he begins the conversation with: “Well, everything we thought for the last 30 years is no longer relevant.”
That pretty much sums up the disorienting sense of shock and awe that the popular uprising in Egypt has inflicted on the psyche of Israel’s establishment. The peace treaty with a stable Egypt was the unspoken foundation for every geopolitical and economic policy in Israel for the last 35 years, and now it’s gone. It’s as if Americans suddenly woke up and found both Mexico and Canada plunged into turmoil on the same day.
“Everything that once anchored our world is now unmoored,” remarked Mark Heller, a Tel Aviv University strategist. “And it is happening right at a moment when nuclearization of the region hangs in the air.”
This is a perilous time for Israel, and its anxiety is understandable. But I fear Israel could make its situation even more perilous if it succumbs to the argument one hears from a number of senior Israeli officials today that the events in Egypt prove that Israel can’t make a lasting peace with the Palestinians. It’s wrong and dangerous.
To be sure, Hosni Mubarak, Israel’s longtime ally, deserves all the wrath being directed at him. The best time to make any big, hard decision is when you are at your maximum strength. You’ll always think and act more clearly. For the last 20 years, President Mubarak has had all the leverage he could ever want to truly reform Egypt’s economy and build a moderate, legitimate political center to fill the void between his authoritarian state and the Muslim Brotherhood. But Mubarak deliberately maintained the political vacuum between himself and the Islamists so that he could always tell the world, “It’s either me or them.” Now he is trying to reform in a panic with no leverage. Too late.
But Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu of Israel is in danger of becoming the Mubarak of the peace process. Israel has never had more leverage vis-à-vis the Palestinians and never had more responsible Palestinian partners. But Netanyahu has found every excuse for not putting a peace plan on the table. The Americans know it. And thanks to the nasty job that Qatar’s Al Jazeera TV just did in releasing out of context all the Palestinian concessions — to embarrass the Palestinian leadership — it’s now obvious to all how far the Palestinians have come.
No, I do not know if this Palestinian leadership has the fortitude to close a deal. But I do know this: Israel has an overwhelming interest in going the extra mile to test them.
Why? With the leaders of both Egypt and Jordan scrambling to shuffle their governments in an effort to stay ahead of the street, two things can be said for sure: Whatever happens in the only two Arab states that have peace treaties with Israel, the moderate secularists who had a monopoly of power will be weaker and the previously confined Muslim Brotherhood will be stronger. How much remains to be seen.
As such, it is virtually certain that the next Egyptian government will not have the patience or room that Mubarak did to maneuver with Israel. Same with the new Jordanian cabinet. Make no mistake: The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has nothing to do with sparking the demonstrations in Egypt and Jordan, but Israeli-Palestinian relations will be impacted by the events in both countries.
If Israel does not make a concerted effort to strike a deal with the Palestinians, the next Egyptian government will “have to distance itself from Israel because it will not have the stake in maintaining the close relationship that Mubarak had,” said Khalil Shikaki, a Palestinian pollster. With the big political changes in the region, “if Israel remains paranoid and messianic and greedy it will lose all its Arab friends.”
To put it bluntly, if Israelis tell themselves that Egypt’s unrest proves why Israel cannot make peace with the Palestinian Authority, then they will be talking themselves into becoming an apartheid state — they will be talking themselves into permanently absorbing the West Bank and thereby laying the seeds for an Arab majority ruled by a Jewish minority between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River.
What the turmoil in Egypt also demonstrates is how much Israel is surrounded by a huge population of young Arabs and Muslims who have been living outside of history — insulated by oil and autocracy from the great global trends. But that’s over.
“Today your legitimacy has to be based on what you deliver,” the Palestinian prime minister, Salam Fayyad, explained to me in his Ramallah office. “Gone are the days when you can say, ‘Deal with me because the other guys are worse.’ ”
I had given up on Netanyahu’s cabinet and urged the U.S. to walk away. But that was B.E. — Before Egypt. Today, I believe President Obama should put his own peace plan on the table, bridging the Israeli and Palestinian positions, and demand that the two sides negotiate on it without any preconditions. It is vital for Israel’s future — at a time when there is already a global campaign to delegitimize the Jewish state — that it disentangle itself from the Arabs’ story as much as possible. There is a huge storm coming, Israel. Get out of the way.
:superdude: says: I think this is a pretty fair and balanced article, as it makes neither side look like a bad guy, merely as being trapped by the security dilemma which they should ignore at this time to make strides towards lasting peace. And I do like Friedman's idea of getting Obama to be proactive on that front. Bush was really pro-Israel, but he made zero effort to actually get aggressive with both sides and both in getting them to the table and keeping them there until a breakthrough was reached.
-
Nobody? :sadpanda:
-
Sorry, Superdude. I'm still not completely sure where I stand on this. Israel does have a problem with being illegitimized. But I really do wonder why we're supposed to take it legitimately?
And, as always, I'm completely for the United States not playing around in the middle east.
-
Sorry, Superdude. I'm still not completely sure where I stand on this. Isreal does have a problem with being illegitimized. But I really do wonder why we're supposed to take it legitimately?
And, as always, I'm completely for the United States not playing around in the middle east.
+1
They have far too big a conflict of interest relating to oil. Plus, from what I've read, Middle Eastern citizenary is overwhelmingly different from the US, and as such they should keep their paws nose out
(I think I just made up two words :D)
-
I still have no idea what a Jewish state is :sadpanda:
-
Whatever happens, happens.
Will Hosni's successor be as friendly with Israel? Probably not. Will he abdicate the treaty? Probably not.
Deal with it.
-
Sorry, Superdude. I'm still not completely sure where I stand on this. Israel does have a problem with being illegitimized. But I really do wonder why we're supposed to take it legitimately?
And, as always, I'm completely for the United States not playing around in the middle east.
Perhaps because they are recognized by numerous members of the UN as a legitimate state?
Actually, fuck this. I know exactly where this discussion is gonna end up. I quit.
-
Super Dude, I don't know what I did to deserve your wrath, but I just don't get it. The whole problem exists because when Jews and Arabs sat down at a table together, the UN decided to force a plan that the Jews were OK with but that the Arabs never accepted. What are you expecting Obama to be able to do at a new meeting table?
That, in sum, is why the Israel arrangement is the UN's greatest fumble ever. And the violence which has never stopped is directly related, in a lot of ways, to the fact that the UN arrangement was never agreed upon by most of the people it effected.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but is that not the case?
It's hard for me to get this whole situation down when I've always heard such conflicted things about the very core.
-
... never agreed upon by most of the people it effected.
Correct me if I'm wrong
I see wat you did thar.
-
Super Dude, I don't know what I did to deserve your wrath, but I just don't get it. The whole problem exists because when Jews and Arabs sat down at a table together, the UN decided to force a plan that the Jews were OK with but that the Arabs never accepted. What are you expecting Obama to be able to do at a new meeting table?
That, in sum, is why the Israel arrangement is the UN's greatest fumble ever. And the violence which has never stopped is directly related, in a lot of ways, to the fact that the UN arrangement was never agreed upon by most of the people it effected.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but is that not the case?
It's hard for me to get this whole situation down when I've always heard such conflicted things about the very core.
I wasn't directing my wrath at you specifically, I'm just tired of fighting this fight. Instead of laboring through the explanation I'll just show you this: https://www.mideastweb.org/ - Literally everything you need to know about the conflict, from a brief introduction to historical relations between Jews and Muslims, to the ancient land of Judea, to the subsequent Ottoman territory, all the way to the recent secret Palestinian peace plan. And yes, it's balanced.
-
Thanks man, I'll check it out.
Also, I've never participated in this argument before so be easy on me :lol
-
Looks like Louis Theroux has a documentary coming out about "ultra-Zionists" :
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-12347050
Louis Theroux spends time with ultra-nationalist Jewish settlers and discovers a small, but very committed subculture.
On a hilltop in the Northern West Bank, not far from the large Palestinian city of Nablus, I met 17-year-old Yair Lieberman.
A part-time labourer and student, Yair's home was a makeshift canvas-covered structure, only slightly more solid than a tent, which he shared with three other young men. The bed was a tangled mess of sheets, in the style of a conventional teenager's, and hung around the dwelling were posters - though not of pop groups, but of favourite rabbis. Outside, in the neighbouring lots, was a scattering of fifteen or so caravans and trailers - the outpost of Havat Gilad.
Like the settlements up and down the West Bank, Havat Gilad is illegal under international law. It lies miles inside the territory won by Israel in the 1967 war and the vast majority of the surrounding population is Palestinian. But Havat Gilad is also illegal under Israeli law. Electricity comes from a generator. Water is trucked in.
Yair moved up to Havat Gilad a couple of years ago. On a tour around the hilltop, I asked him why he'd decided to make his life in this ramshackle encampment, at the end of a dirt road, on an inhospitable hilltop among Arab olive groves.
"If we're not here there's a [Palestinian] city and we don't want another [Palestinian] city," he said.
What, I wondered, would be so bad about another Palestinian city?
"Because it's my land! It's the land of Israel. It's not the land of Palestinians."
Yair's beliefs are shared by a hardcore religious nationalist fringe of Jewish Israelis who have chosen to make their home up and down the West Bank and in East Jerusalem. They say that those areas belong by right to the Jewish people - a title claim based mainly on the bible.
The fact that there are nearly ten times as many Arabs as there are Jews in the West Bank, with their own dreams of a national homeland, they regard as a side-issue.
I was making a documentary about these ultra-nationalist Jewish settlers, called The Ultra-Zionists. For several weeks I'd been spending time in some of the most hardcore and uncompromising sections of the Israeli nationalist community - the Jewish enclave in Hebron, in the hilltops in the north of the West Bank, and in the crowded Arab neighbourhoods of East Jerusalem - choosing to come at a time when peace talks were ongoing and the extreme settlers were therefore more embattled.
For many years I'd been fascinated by extreme nationalists - and I'd hoped the issue of the West Bank and its settlement by extreme religious Jews would be a chance to understand this mindset at first hand.
The day before meeting Yair I'd travelled up to the nearby outpost of Givat Ronen, known to be, if anything, an even more radical and nationalistic community. Early that morning I'd learned that the Israeli army had taken the fairly unusual step of actually enforcing the law against the extreme settlers and dismantling a small house and a goat shed.
Given that the whole community was illegal under Israeli law, the army's action was somewhat tokenistic. But even this was enough to set off local Jewish settler youths who reacted by stoning the shops in a nearby Palestinian village and setting fire to the hillside.
It might be easy to write off these "ultra-Zionists" as people on the fringe of a fringe in terms of their outlook and beliefs. And it is true that many, if not most, Israelis say they would be happy to pull out of most of the occupied territories if they were confident it would lead to peace.
But what makes the extreme settlers more troubling is that they also enjoy a degree of support from the Israeli state. Surprising as it may seem, many illegal outposts like Yair's are protected by the Israeli army. And in East Jerusalem and Hebron the Jewish presence is fully legal under Israeli law and underwritten and guaranteed by a vast security force.
The anger and despair of the Palestinians at the settling of foreigners in their midst is palpable. Many say they would be happy to have Jewish neighbours but not while they don't enjoy the same rights or have the same sovereignty. Towards the end of my stay, one of the settler security guards in East Jerusalem shot and killed a Palestinian man. Rioting was widespread and it seemed to me how close the country was to a third intifada.
Not long after that I left Jerusalem, but not before I visited Yair again. Once again I found him friendly, likeable, and yet profoundly lacking in perspective of how his national aspirations were trampling on the rights of millions of Palestinians.
With the very vague possibility of peace on the horizon, I asked if he wasn't worried about being told to leave.
"If they want they can take me by power and I'm going to come back illegally," he said. "This is our land. You can come and kill us and do whatever you want. We're going to die for this country."
-
I know this must be very disconcerting for Israel to see their fragile alliances being shred to pieces right now, but in the end it was also just a question of time and in fact it is amazing this lasted for 30 years.
The thing IMHO it comes down to is that the public actually knows what they want, not just what they don't want. It seems the Egyptians want more freedom, and that can never be a bad thing.
rumborak
-
I mean it remains to be seen whether the Muslim Brotherhood can indeed provide said freedom, but we'll have to wait on that one.
-
I'm having serious trouble trying to understand what "Jew" means. The first definition I found is,
"A member of the people and cultural community whose traditional religion is Judaism and who trace their origins through the ancient Hebrew people of Israel to Abraham"
... which clearly doesn't fit the way the word is used, since we still call non-practicing Jews "Jewish." The reason this is so confusing is because in the ancient times they didn't distinguish between race, religion or nation, elements that, in theory, have no connection whatsoever in Western democracies. It seems like the vagueness of this term covers up to an extent the ideology of Israel as a race-based nation. Except it's not the modern understanding of a race, which is purely biological. It's the more ancient view of a race, where there are spiritual characteristics as well (chosen people). Of course this is a view that originated when conversions to different religions very rarely occurred and when kings would intermarry their children as signs of peace. It's the view of a god having his own group of people. And this view seems to have died out in other parts of the world (as "my god is stronger than your god" was replaced by monotheism) but it survived in the traditions of the Jews. The contradictions of modern Israel seem to be a result of trying to integrate democracy with this old race identity. There seems to be a need to define Israel as "Jewish state" in order to make sense of its existence, and yet the term "Jew" is still just a vague idea in people's minds, and vague ideas are problematic in politics.
-
So, Super Dude, how many times have we explained that here now?
-
:lol I'll just try to simplify it as much as possible: to be a Jew is to belong a national group that identifies most by culturo-historical commonalities.
-
I don't see how the definition of "Jew" is in any way different than that of "Christian" in that sense, other than that being Jewish is officially considered hereditary.
rumborak
-
It's more complex than that, but it's damned hard to explain why. One part is the hereditary issue, but there's also that thing about Jews who identify as such and are atheists or totally non-practising. And although our culture and history is spiritualized, our secular culture and history is "consumed" (for lack of a better term) in the way American cultural history or German cultural history might, especially in the modern period. Ugh, I wish there was a better way of grasping at what separates Judaism from Jewishness and I'll keep trying, but the best I can do right now is to tell you to watch My Big Fat Greek Wedding. I know that sounds lame and unscientific (in terms of its imprecision and the reliance on a movie of all things), but just do it. You learn a lot about how Jewish culture and Jewishness works by looking at real-world and artificial representations of other Mediterranean-based cultures.
Edit: Just to clarify, I'm not saying that MBFGW is supposed to explain to you what it means to be a Jew. I mean that the way in which it goes about explaining what it means to be Greek is similar to how I might explain what it means to be a Jew; the movie itself makes plain that it's more than a racial, national, or religious thing, but rather it encompasses all aspects of the lives of those who retain that identity, in ways that it's difficult to explain in words.
-
:lol I'll just try to simplify it as much as possible: to be a Jew is to belong a national group that identifies most by culturo-historical commonalities.
Not all Jews have a sense of belonging to a national group. Mike Portnoy for example. When he says he's a Jew he's talking about something racial or ethnic, not something connected to anything national.
-
They may not have that sense, but that's the best I can do. There is a thread floating around somewhere containing a good five or six pages of trying to get at a workable definition, look it up if you want.
-
The Dutch have apparently accepted Israel as a Jewish state.
https://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=208099
-
FINALLY. :P
This is an interesting development, considering the widespread anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish protests in the 2009 Gaza War (in fact the Netherlands were noted for their instances of protest and rhetoric that went as far as being anti-Semitic).
-
Is this good though? I mean, I fully support the recognition of Israel as a country, but recognizing Israel as a Jewish state sounds, if anything, as a step backwards. If the Dutch are praising Israel as the only country in the ME that can call itself a modern democracy, I don't see how firmly lodging the religion into the definition of that state would help. The only effect I could see is an invitation to treat non-Jews as second-grade citizens.
rumborak
-
True, but identifying the state as Jewish does not mean defining it as religious to all Jews. That's just something the religious right and the rest of the country are going to have to work out themselves.
-
Maybe. It just strikes me that Israel could, or maybe should, lead as an example of secularism in that region. That is, make the country a haven for the Jews of the world, but at the same time be a modern state that separates church and state.
rumborak
-
Maybe. It just strikes me that Israel could, or maybe should, lead as an example of secularism in that region. That is, make the country a haven for the Jews of the world, but at the same time be a modern state that separates church and state.
rumborak
Yeah, believe me, that is at the core of the state's problems right now. In the "Israel Assassinations" thread I discussed how a lot of the domestic and foreign relations problems that beset Israel, including and especially the deal with the Palestinians, can be traced back to the religious right. Where leftists see relations with the Palestinians as a security issue and therefore enact policies and deploy the military based on a defensive stance, where they are willing to make concessions with the PLO and other factions for lasting interstate peace, the religious right will not have it. Rightists are the ones who go into Gaza and the West Bank, without endorsement and sometimes even with active defiance of the Israeli government, and establish settlements in what they consider the full and complete ancient kingdom of Israel. They're the ones who, as opposed to leftists who remain in the state of war as a response to terrorism, advocate military missions in Palestinian territory because they are in favor of a one-state solution ONLY. It's even worse because Jewish Orthodoxy also comes with automatic exemption from the Israeli army (courtesy of their own historic push to make it so), which is compulsory for all other non-Arabs.
I've always said that the one thing that the US and Israel have in common is the root of all their problems, and that's the religious right.
-
I hear ya, and it's frankly the reason why I just can't mount much sympathy for the Israeli-Palestinian situation. Both sides still value their religious goals higher than the loss of life, and before that changes there will be no peace.
rumborak
-
I wouldn't say that's *totally* true; it's just the religious nuts speak the loudest, while the non-religious and leftists on either side represent the quieter moderate voice.
-
It's even worse because Jewish Orthodoxy also comes with automatic exemption from the Israeli army (courtesy of their own historic push to make it so), which is compulsory for all other non-Arabs.
I'm assuming you're speaking of the Hassidic Jews with their black costumes and long side burns (because if I understand correctly they are the ones who are exempt from the military, for whatever reason). Are those really the people who represent the political far-right in Israel? Those guys are pretty much bums. I don't see how they could survive in the settlements.
-
Black costumes? They're suits, dude. :P
And yes, that's them. The only Hasids more ridiculous than them are the Diaspora anti-Zionists, who base their hatred of Israel on the fact that the messiah has not arrived.
-
... bums?
They're hardly bums
-
Well in the sense that they demand so much of the state to its own detriment without contributing anything of their own except burdensome religious laws (amid a modern social democracy) might qualify them as such.
-
Do they even have proper jobs? My tour guide called them bums because they are tax exempt and get state support.
-
Do they even have proper jobs? My tour guide called them bums because they are tax exempt and get state support.
.....like american churches?
-
Egypt just OKd the crossing of Iranian warships from the Suez channel, enjoy your limited days Israel. :|
-
Egypt just OKd the crossing of Iranian warships from the Suez channel, enjoy your limited days Israel. :|
I've been following this news all day, according to different Egyptian news sites they haven't let them through yet and the army is discussing it, Iran is testing us to know what's new, they're offering a lot of money, Egyptian military has boarded the ships to confirm there are no weapons on it and it's not armed.. can a warship not be armed?
Even though this is not our new government and what happens now will not determine the future of our foreign relations; I hope the army makes the right choice of not letting them through to show good intentions.
-
Yeah, I'm praying this goes well. :(
For reference, I never pray.
-
A different kind of war in the holy land:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xk5JSm1-dAk
-
Did you guys know President Carter was getting sued over his Palestine book?
https://voices.washingtonpost.com/political-bookworm/2011/02/president_carter_named_in_5_mi.html
I haven't read the book but the name-calling, claims of lying and the always laughable "pro-terrorists" is a bit too much for a man like this, he conducted the Camp David negotiations ffs, that led to the first peace treaty between Israel and an Arab country, Egypt of all!
I won't go further till I read it, I just got worked up cause I thought we had more respect for Carter than to treat him like Michael Moore.
-
Eh, I've always been mixed on Carter. Yes he did negotiate that historic agreement and I personally like his environmental record, but the bulk of his contribution to the situation since leaving office has been to criticize Israel, which I feel and I'm sure many of his critics feel undermines his image as someone who cares about those countries.
-
Did you guys know President Carter was getting sued over his Palestine book?
https://voices.washingtonpost.com/political-bookworm/2011/02/president_carter_named_in_5_mi.html
I haven't read the book but the name-calling, claims of lying and the always laughable "pro-terrorists" is a bit too much for a man like this, he conducted the Camp David negotiations ffs, that led to the first peace treaty between Israel and an Arab country, Egypt of all!
I won't go further till I read it, I just got worked up cause I thought we had more respect for Carter than to treat him like Michael Moore.
Carter is pretty famously anti-israel. And not just logically criticle of Israel, but extremely, blatantly anti-israel. Luckily I don't pay him much mind, and trying to sue him is pretty pointless.
-
Pretty much what Adami said. :P
In other Israeli news completely unrelated to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (for a change), anyone open to discuss the very promising future in the Israeli economy? I've heard whispers of a possible rising local economic power, which I like to believe may open up a new avenue for the peace process to exploit and finally lift Israel to greater and more meaningful international significance.
https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4029553,00.html
There was a much better article I was looking at a few days ago that basically said that Israel has the ability and opportunity to replace America and Japan as the global technological powerhouse, and use that to posture itself as a major economic power in the Middle East if not eventually on a much larger scale.
-
I don't really see how Israel's economy growing would necessarily benefit the peace process, at least one consisting of two independent states. It could go either way. It could actually benefit Palestinians or it could serve to further the colonial network, just like "growth" is used as an excuse to expand settlements.
-
Like you said, it could work two ways, depending on how you see the political situation there. For one, Israelis might use their economic power as a bargaining chip, literally buying peace from neighbors (and you'd have to be an idiot political leader to not want to cash in when a major economic power comes to your door). Remember that although you may perceive them as this big, bad colonial power, and many Israelis do support those policies in order to take over the entire area of Israel and Palestine, still many Israelis are reluctant to draw up peace agreements because there's a security dilemma and they want some sort of solid guarantee that peace will be upheld with favorable terms indefinitely, which means of course buying peace from your neighbors. This means for example engaging in friendly trade with Egypt to curry favor with its new government, engaging in trade with Iran to open up a dialogue finally, but it could also mean expanding the Israeli labor market, namely to unemployed or underemployed Palestinians.
Obviously there are already Palestinians working in Israel, but as you can imagine the current situation sees a lot of career and income imbalance (not due to prejudice, but rather because of the jobs Israeli employees trust Palestinians to undertake); if the Israeli economy has a boom and it's not able to fill it with its own people (which would be unwise after a certain point as any economist will probably chime in to say), there's already an able and willing labor market right next door, which could again mean the possibility of cooling relations between the two peoples. Israelis will cool to Palestinians who they'll pretty much need as their labor safety valve, and a larger number of Palestinians will be earning a sufficient income to bring real, lasting wealth and maybe even public improvement to their respective territories.
Israelis aren't blind to the Palestinians' suffering for the last 60 years; it's just hard to acknowledge it when suicide bombers, riots, and random missiles come flying out the other side. If the above scenario happens and they're able to point to money being used to create and sustain economic development in the territories rather than to funding terrorist activities, they'll be more open to talks.
The other way this could work would again make Israel feel more open to talks, but rather because the growth itself is a safety valve. I've never heard that growth justification you mentioned, but I can tell you from my personal experience and studies of Israeli history that while they've been more economically powerful than Palestine, they still barely cut it; all the money they get from the US to fund their military is more than just a number showing how much importance they put into it. Up until the last few years, the New Shekel has been weak, and the Shekel that preceded it...well, they had to create a new currency afterwards, so you figure it out. In summary, Israel's economic history until I'd say 2006 or so looked like Brazil's from the Great Depression until around 2006 as well.
Anyway, you can imagine what sort of existential fears and other anxieties probably ensue from pouring so much money into the military under a weak (although in recent years until 2006 not really *weak*, just not strong) economy and still not being able to effect peace with your neighbors. It's possible that once the economy takes off (and I'm not saying it's definite, I'm just saying it's like...60-80% likely, provided current events don't culminate in some catastrophic downturn for Israel politically or economically), Israelis will feel less anxious about existential fears and feel more in a position to be more lax about all policies and problems on the table. Err something. I kinda wanted to write this scenario first because I knew it would be complicated to explain, and now I forgot what the punchline was. :lol But it is true that Israelis and even many Diaspora Jews perceived the national economy until recently as weak or unstable (as would probably be obvious to anyone who notices it's the New Shekel).
-
Also as to the first scenario described, I think that even though Palestinians are already heavily dependent on Israel, I think the creation of interdependence could be very good for both parties. If it could lead to Palestinians viewing their dependence as mutual rather than one-sided, it could lead to a much healthier view of Israelis on the part of Palestinians, and the Palestinians might finally earn the trust of the Israelis.
-
Obviously there are already Palestinians working in Israel, but as you can imagine the current situation sees a lot of career and income imbalance (not due to prejudice, but rather because of the jobs Israeli employees trust Palestinians to undertake); if the Israeli economy has a boom and it's not able to fill it with its own people (which would be unwise after a certain point as any economist will probably chime in to say), there's already an able and willing labor market right next door, which could again mean the possibility of cooling relations between the two peoples. Israelis will cool to Palestinians who they'll pretty much need as their labor safety valve, and a larger number of Palestinians will be earning a sufficient income to bring real, lasting wealth and maybe even public improvement to their respective territories.
Whether income imbalance is related to prejudice or not is a whole other issue, but this entire narrative you have going is bizarre. The GDP (not really the best indicator of economic health anyways) grew in 2010 but so did the unemployment rate. From what I've heard the demand for Palestinian workers in Israel has dried up. The Palestinian economy (for lack of better words) is unable to grow in any ways, as they aren't allowed any political independence. Maybe there are some nice jobs available on the other side of the wall, but since there is no national equality, there can be no truly bilateral economic cooperation.
-
Alright so I stand corrected; I wasn't aware of that unemployment bit, so my scenario was in error out of genuine ignorance. Although I will maintain that the post before your response depicts a likely scenario should the labor market open up some. Also I'm operating on around 3 1/2 hours of sleep.
-
BTW my own vision of the ideal peace conditions would be one of mutual dependence as described.
-
Additionally, although I know it's somewhat late for this, I'd like to note that what reads to you as an illogical and blind defense of Israeli defense policy is more a kneejerk reaction on my part than anything, based on my personal basic belief that Israel has a right to defend itself from terrorist attacks, and I do not in any way endorse the inherent occupation of Palestine (i.e. my defense is based on the Israeli security dilemma). My kneejerk reaction is more due to the fact that although the actions deserve criticism, I believe that the criticism may be overly harsh, especially since the intent is, as mentioned, part and parcel to the Israeli security dilemma.
-
BTW your avatar looks like Ariel Sharon.
-
Huh??? Sorry for the triple post, again running on very little sleep.
-
(https://www.israelnewsagency.com/arielsharonisrael.jpg)
-
I don't see it
-
Damn it ack I had almost forgotten that pig's face.
-
Now you'll get to remember it each time you see Superdude's jewfish.
-
Ack that's borderline offensive. Watch it
-
Things could get ugly in Israel... settlement family murdered near Nablus.
https://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/idf-launches-massive-manhunt-after-five-family-members-slain-in-settlement-attack-1.348707
-
Things could get ugly in Israel... settlement family murdered near Nablus.
https://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/idf-launches-massive-manhunt-after-five-family-members-slain-in-settlement-attack-1.348707
They stabbed a baby to death. That seems rather horrific.
I just hope Israel doesn't use this as an excuse to gain a stronger presence in the West Bank.
-
Hopefully not, and I'd like to see this result in the PLO rising to the challenge of providing real civil governance, i.e. trying the case in a Palestinian court and sentencing the perp to a reasonable (democratic) punishment. I don't know really know how that sort of thing works, but it would be a great chance for the PLO to show that they can keep the peace and a mutually satisfactory way without Israel stepping in.
-
Here's an interesting find:
https://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/15/opinion/l15mideast.html?src=ISMR_HP_LI_LST_FB
-
So there was just a bus bomb in Jerusalem and now there's a FB group circulating like wildfire called Third Intifada.
Here we go again.
-
So there was just a bus bomb in Jerusalem and now there's a FB group circulating like wildfire called Third Intifada.
Here we go again.
Oh god.
-
Don't worry, they're gonna kill that uprising too https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4046853,00.html
Fuckers just don't wanna be oppressed silently, gotta make "facebook" page about it and make an uprising so we would stop getting rapped, oh how "modern" of you Palestine heh
-
Bombing a bus stop is going to stop them from getting raped? I don't think I understand what you meant.
If anything, I'd hope the Palestinians would start doing major peaceful protests. Might actually help.
-
So there was just a bus bomb in Jerusalem and now there's a FB group circulating like wildfire called Third Intifada.
Here we go again.
Oh god.
I'm not sure whether this was in response to just hearing this news, me bringing up the FB page, or something else; please clarify.
Bombing a bus stop is going to stop them from getting raped? I don't think I understand what you meant.
If anything, I'd hope the Palestinians would start doing major peaceful protests. Might actually help.
Yeah I mean I know it happens on a small scale from personal experience, I remember in either '06 or '07 driving by some well-dressed Palestinian private schoolers who were taking part in a rally of some sort just outside of the Old City. That's all I remember though. And I would love to see that undertaken on a larger scale as well; certainly would go a long way in dispelling a lot of the distrust Israelis have for Palestinians in general.
-
My oh god was about what has happened and what now will happen.
Palestinians bomb random israeli citizens in some odd effort to achieve freedom.
Israelis take more freedom away from palestinians, thinking that for some reason it would actually help anything.
Cycle continues.
Oh god.
-
It might sound calloused, but at this point I've just grown numb reading about one group of religious nutjobs having killed another group of religious nutjobs. Despite the horrendous nature of the crime, I also have to wonder what thought process led the family to the conclusion that living in an illegal settlement with a one-month old is good parenting.
rumborak
-
It might sound calloused, but at this point I've just grown numb reading about one group of religious nutjobs having killed another group of religious nutjobs. Despite the horrendous nature of the crime, I also have to wonder what thought process led the family to the conclusion that living in an illegal settlement with a one-month old is good parenting.
rumborak
Living in a disputed territory isn't an excuse to get murdered like that. You have no idea why the family lived where they did, so saying it's just a bunch of religious nut jobs being murdered is pretty sad.
If a family lives in a bad neighborhood in America, is it no big deal when they get murdered?
Also, the people at the bus stop might not have been religious at all. Just people catching a bus.
-
I personally wouldn't consider religion to be a factor in either side's nutjobbery.
-
It might sound calloused, but at this point I've just grown numb reading about one group of religious nutjobs having killed another group of religious nutjobs. Despite the horrendous nature of the crime, I also have to wonder what thought process led the family to the conclusion that living in an illegal settlement with a one-month old is good parenting.
rumborak
Living in a disputed territory isn't an excuse to get murdered like that. You have no idea why the family lived where they did, so saying it's just a bunch of religious nut jobs being murdered is pretty sad.
If a family lives in a bad neighborhood in America, is it no big deal when they get murdered?
Also, the people at the bus stop might not have been religious at all. Just people catching a bus.
Yeah although the murder of that entire family is more horrific to me, I'd say the consequences of this last one are gonna much graver. Although to the note that Israelis will take away more freedoms from Palestinians and make them more angry, I realize it's the wrong way to go about it, but honestly, what would happen if they gave more freedom? I don't mean the Palestinian people shouldn't be a free, autonomous sovereign nation, but I don't know about the consequences of doing so in the immediate aftermath of such an event.
-
I personally wouldn't consider religion to be a factor in either side's nutjobbery.
Probably not the palestinians, but not counting government officials, the israelis who are anti-peace are 99/100 the ultra orthodox.
-
It might sound calloused, but at this point I've just grown numb reading about one group of religious nutjobs having killed another group of religious nutjobs. Despite the horrendous nature of the crime, I also have to wonder what thought process led the family to the conclusion that living in an illegal settlement with a one-month old is good parenting.
rumborak
Living in a disputed territory isn't an excuse to get murdered like that. You have no idea why the family lived where they did, so saying it's just a bunch of religious nut jobs being murdered is pretty sad.
If a family lives in a bad neighborhood in America, is it no big deal when they get murdered?
Also, the people at the bus stop might not have been religious at all. Just people catching a bus.
Yeah although the murder of that entire family is more horrific to me, I'd say the consequences of this last one are gonna much graver. Although to the note that Israelis will take away more freedoms from Palestinians and make them more angry, I realize it's the wrong way to go about it, but honestly, what would happen if they gave more freedom? I don't mean the Palestinian people shouldn't be a free, autonomous sovereign nation, but I don't know about the consequences of doing so in the immediate aftermath of such an event.
Well I wouldn't make their freedom the intended subject of the action. But in the end, I usually refer back to the Pain of Salvation quote that really sums a lot of it up.
"If you take from those you fear, everything they value, you have bred the perfect beast, drained enough to kill you"
-
I personally wouldn't consider religion to be a factor in either side's nutjobbery.
Probably not the palestinians, but not counting government officials, the israelis who are anti-peace are 99/100 the ultra orthodox.
Is their orthodoxy the reason for their aggression?
-
I personally wouldn't consider religion to be a factor in either side's nutjobbery.
Probably not the palestinians, but not counting government officials, the israelis who are anti-peace are 99/100 the ultra orthodox.
Is their orthodoxy the reason for their aggression?
Eh, I guess in the end all aggression can just be attributed to who they are as people. But it's not a coincidence that the secular israelis, or less religious israelis are usually MUCH more pro peace, while the orthodox and ultra religious are anti-peace and pro-gaining as much land as humanly possible.
-
I personally wouldn't consider religion to be a factor in either side's nutjobbery.
Probably not the palestinians, but not counting government officials, the israelis who are anti-peace are 99/100 the ultra orthodox.
I don't know about the Palestinian *people* but Hamas and other groups who encourage violence use a highly religious pretext for it.
I personally wouldn't consider religion to be a factor in either side's nutjobbery.
Probably not the palestinians, but not counting government officials, the israelis who are anti-peace are 99/100 the ultra orthodox.
Is their orthodoxy the reason for their aggression?
Eh, I guess in the end all aggression can just be attributed to who they are as people. But it's not a coincidence that the secular israelis, or less religious israelis are usually MUCH more pro peace, while the orthodox and ultra religious are anti-peace and pro-gaining as much land as humanly possible.
I wouldn't say it's aggression so much as an us vs. them attitude. Believe me, I've spent plenty of time around it. They consider themselves victims as does everyone else caught in the crossfire of this conflict, and they're totally open to playing that card.
-
Living in a disputed territory isn't an excuse to get murdered like that. You have no idea why the family lived where they did, so saying it's just a bunch of religious nut jobs being murdered is pretty sad.
No offense, but what other reason than an extreme understanding of the term "Israel" makes people settle in Itamar, an area internationally considered part of Palestine? Everyone living in that area will be aware of that, you can't tell me that family just "happened" to see a nice building in an Israeli newspaper an decided to move there.
Any Jewish family living in Itamar puts Zionism above the safety of their children. And that's where I slowly check out.
I mean, I don't open a golf store in the South Bronx either.
Bomb at bus stop, very different story.
rumborak
-
I personally wouldn't consider religion to be a factor in either side's nutjobbery.
Probably not the palestinians, but not counting government officials, the israelis who are anti-peace are 99/100 the ultra orthodox.
I don't know about the Palestinian *people* but Hamas and other groups who encourage violence use a highly religious pretext for it.
And by definition, that pretext is contrary to their actual reasoning. Conversely, the ultra-orthodox Israelis use defense as a pretext for their religious ambitions.
And I used aggression merely to refer to an act of hostility; not intent.
-
Was finally able to read up on this. Turns out the lady killed was British, a reminder that using violence against civilians is violence against humanity (60 wounded seems to be an exaggeration). Netanyahu is saying they will respond harshly, but I'm wondering against who.
-
1. According to the British Embassy the number injured was 38, though to be honest 60 injured from an attack like this isn't farfetched.
2. Palestinian militant and terrorist groups.
-
Was finally able to read up on this. Turns out the lady killed was British, a reminder that using violence against civilians is violence against humanity (60 wounded seems to be an exaggeration). Netanyahu is saying they will respond harshly, but I'm wondering against who.
1. Good thing she wasn't Israeli then, or else I guess it wouldn't be violence against humanity eh?
2. My guess would be accidentally the wrong people, like usual.
-
israel/palestine is gettin jelly over the north africans. it's always me me for them ju jus.
-
Israel eases steps to revoke citizenship
https://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/28/us-israel-parliament-arabs-idUSTRE72R6OH20110328
Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, whose ultra-nationalist party sponsored the measure, proclaimed victory after the vote, saying he had fulfilled a pledge to voters to crack down on any "citizen who sides with the enemy."
Oh Lolberman
Also last week, ultra-nationalist lawmaker Danny Danon held a hearing to upbraid the Jewish-American "J-Street," saying the group, which critises Jewish settlement-building in occupied land, should be shunned as "pro-Palestinian, not pro-Israeli."
David Gilo, a J-Street leader, rejected the charge. "We are Zionists and care about Israel," Gilo told the Knesset panel.
Good indications that J-Street is successfully trolling rightists in the motherland.
-
See, this is exactly the sort of thing I'm talking about. If Israeli politics (and American politics) could be dominated by leftists, so many problems could be easily resolved: two state solution would probably have been passed by now (and if not then at least they'd handle Palestinian terrorism better), this citizenship shit would never happen, and Halacha could probably be dropped from Israeli law and brought down to the level of positive religious freedoms. Basically I sometimes agree with the intention behind rightist acts, but basically they do it so wrong, and do nothing but ill for Israel's international image.
-
Found a great article about Israel and some other countries in the face of this new Arab Revolution:
https://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/29/opinion/29iht-edcohen29.html?_r=1&hp
Also, told ya: Israel’s ultra-Orthodox Shas party has an outsized influence over Israel because of coalition politics. That’s a problem.
-
This was published yesterday, too lazy to copy the text itself so just click the link: https://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/03/world/middleeast/03mideast.html?_r=1&src=ISMR_HP_LO_MST_FB
I have mixed feelings about this, as should be obvious. I don't mind Israel and Palestine being forced into peace, and I'd rather it be a mutual thing rather than Israel forced to cooperate with Palestine and not also the other way around, but my main gripe is with Jerusalem, which I want to be an international city as in the 1948 agreement, owned by neither party.
-
but my main gripe is with Jerusalem, which I want to be an international city as in the 1948 agreement, owned by neither party.
I totally agree that Israel should be an international city.
-
I think you mean Jerusalem.
-
I think you mean Jerusalem.
I wouldn't be so sure.
-
I think you mean Jerusalem.
I wouldn't be so sure.
Sad but true.
-
Haha whoops I meant Jerusalem.
-
I know this has nothing to do with politics, but this is the Israel discussion thread and I have a story that I just remembered from a time when I was in Israel.
It was summer 2009, and I was on this study abroad/tour of Israel program hosted by my state's Jewish Federation, and I was there with about a dozen other college kids. We had gone to visit this really major church in northern Israel where the Virgin Mary was supposedly told by Gabriel that she would be pregnant, and I'd drank like a thousand bottles of water 'cause it was hot as hell. I had to piss like a racehorse. I tried to hold it in for a while but it was no use, and I went ahead of the group to look for a bathroom. Damn those ancient temples hiding the restrooms in their infrastructure.
I got up onto what might be described as a veranda, and saw a tour group ahead of me. They were Asian of some sort but I couldn't tell if they were Japanese or Korean because I was too far away to hear them speak. I ran up to them and asked, "Toire wa doko desuka?" By some great miracle, they understood me! Suffice it to say, the story had a happy ending. :P My trip to Japan the previous year paid off, and I got to use Japanese in Israel. ;D
-
If you're in a tourist area and there are a bunch of people wearing the same color hat, 98% of the time they're a Japanese group.
-
:lol
-
I didn't know Facebook actually removed the Third Palestinian Uprising Page, apparently a week ago https://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/29/facebook-removes-palestinian-intifada-page/
-
Well I can't say I'm displeased at that news.
-
I didn't know Facebook actually removed the Third Palestinian Uprising Page, apparently a week ago https://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/29/facebook-removes-palestinian-intifada-page/
From what I understand it got to the point of urging mass violence against jews. If it wdre peaceful I would have supported it.
-
I have to ask my opposition here something, and please answer honestly: in your ideal world, does Israel exist?
-
Not to steal any thunder for Super Dudes question, but I was just reading about the italian guy who got killed. Seems very strange to me. A staunch anti-israel activist was killed by a gaza palestinian group because hamas, another palestinian group wouldn't release one of their men.
Sad world.
Also, I found out the other day that I can't go to my Israel study abroad trip because I, as an israeli citizen, am banned from almost all Palestinian territories. I guess that's one part they neglect to mention when discussing checkpoints.
-
Not to steal any thunder for Super Dudes question, but I was just reading about the italian guy who got killed. Seems very strange to me. A staunch anti-israel activist was killed by a gaza palestinian group because hamas, another palestinian group wouldn't release one of their men.
Sad world.
Also, I found out the other day that I can't go to my Israel study abroad trip because I, as an israeli citizen, am banned from almost all Palestinian territories. I guess that's one part they neglect to mention when discussing checkpoints.
Why?
-
Not to steal any thunder for Super Dudes question, but I was just reading about the italian guy who got killed. Seems very strange to me. A staunch anti-israel activist was killed by a gaza palestinian group because hamas, another palestinian group wouldn't release one of their men.
Sad world.
Also, I found out the other day that I can't go to my Israel study abroad trip because I, as an israeli citizen, am banned from almost all Palestinian territories. I guess that's one part they neglect to mention when discussing checkpoints.
Ask the PA. All non military or celebrity Israeli citizens are banned from places like Bethleham and Rhamallah. I only checked on those two since that's where we'd be going, but I have a feeling most of the west bank is similar.
Why?
-
I have to ask my opposition here something, and please answer honestly: in your ideal world, does Israel exist?
Yes, but it's located in North Dakota.
Holy shit. We could make it Arizona and solve everybody's problems. And besides, they'd appreciate the hot, dry air.
And by the way, I don't think you have any opposition here (aside from Ack), except those you create in your head. Funny that you'd probably lump me into the opponent category, yet my POV is quite similar to Adami's insofar as Israel goes, and I suspect you consider him an ally.
Also, I found out the other day that I can't go to my Israel study abroad trip because I, as an israeli citizen, am banned from almost all Palestinian territories. I guess that's one part they neglect to mention when discussing checkpoints.
Didn't realize you were an Israeli citizen. Far out.
-
Also, I found out the other day that I can't go to my Israel study abroad trip because I, as an israeli citizen, am banned from almost all Palestinian territories. I guess that's one part they neglect to mention when discussing checkpoints.
Didn't realize you were an Israeli citizen. Far out.
Yup, dual citizenship. Keeps me banned from like 15 countries.
yay!
-
Do you live mainly here to there?
-
Do you live mainly here to there?
I can't live there without being drafted or arrested. So I live in America. One day when I can get out of that whole army thing, I might move down there.
However as a musician, Israel isn't exactly the best place to be if I still have any hopes of making it for myself. Israel isn't know for having great music outside of Ofrah Haza.
-
For rock music maybe but Israel is a lead in electronic music.
In 1997 I saw a Dana International music video on MTV when I was in Egypt and got a boner.
In 1998 Larry King interviewed her and I learned a fact that shocked me so deep I can never trust an Israeli musician again :lol
-
For rock music maybe but Israel is a lead in electronic music.
In 1997 I saw a Dana International on MTV when I was in Egypt and got a boner.
In 1998 Larry King interviewed her and I learned a fact that shocked me so deep I can never trust an Israeli musician again :lol
Yup I mean rock music. Israel is crazy horrible at that, not sure why, maybe it's because all the potential rockers have become rabbis or soldiers.
Damn even Iraq has a heavy metal scene that's worth mentioning.
-
Which was first?
-
Also, I found out the other day that I can't go to my Israel study abroad trip because I, as an israeli citizen, am banned from almost all Palestinian territories. I guess that's one part they neglect to mention when discussing checkpoints.
I was wondering about this. It seems weird that all Israelis would be barred since there are a good number of Palestinian Israelis. Any online sources for this?
-
Also, I found out the other day that I can't go to my Israel study abroad trip because I, as an israeli citizen, am banned from almost all Palestinian territories. I guess that's one part they neglect to mention when discussing checkpoints.
I was wondering about this. It seems weird that all Israelis would be barred since there are a good number of Palestinian Israelis. Any online sources for this?
It's the law, just google it.
-
Damn even Iraq has a heavy metal scene that's worth mentioning.
Wait, really? Is there anything online worth hearing? For some reason Iraqi heavy metal music seems worth hearing.
-
Damn even Iraq has a heavy metal scene that's worth mentioning.
Wait, really? Is there anything online worth hearing? For some reason Iraqi heavy metal music seems worth hearing.
Honestly I have no idea. But I'm pretty sure there's a documentary about it.
EDIT: Here it is. https://www.heavymetalinbaghdad.com/about.html
-
Ask the PA. All non military or celebrity Israeli citizens are banned from places like Bethleham and Rhamallah. I only checked on those two since that's where we'd be going, but I have a feeling most of the west bank is similar.
Apparently this is Israeli law, not PA law.
-
Ask the PA. All non military or celebrity Israeli citizens are banned from places like Bethleham and Rhamallah. I only checked on those two since that's where we'd be going, but I have a feeling most of the west bank is similar.
Apparently this is Israeli law, not PA law.
Israeli law regarding Israeli checkpoints, PA law regarding Palestinian check points.
And I can't pass through Israeli checkpoints into Rahamalla because then I'll be identified as Israeli and there's a very high chance I will be shot, stoned to death or beaten to death.
-
If you really wanted to, you could probably just show your U.S. passport and get through with no trouble. When I went into Bethlehem through the main check point they didn't even check passports, neither going in or going out. As long as you don't look Arab they're pretty lax. Not sure about Rhamallah though.
-
If you really wanted to, you could probably just show your U.S. passport and get through with no trouble. When I went into Bethlehem through the main check point they didn't even check passports, neither going in or going out. As long as you don't look Arab they're pretty lax. Not sure about Rhamallah though.
My American passport also identifies me as Israel, no go. And while you're right that there's a chance they won't ask for passports, I'd be going with a group. So if for some reason they DID ask for passports, it would screw things up for the rest of the group, and that's not worth the risk.
-
One thing I wish I had known before I went to Israel is that I could get my stamp on a separate attached paper that could be removed after leaving so that I wouldn't be banned from a bunch of countries :/
-
One thing I wish I had known before I went to Israel is that I could get my stamp on a separate attached paper that could be removed after leaving so that I wouldn't be banned from a bunch of countries :/
Huh, I didn't know you could do that either, not that it would affect my situation.
But isn't it awesome how many countries ban that? Lovely world.
-
I know, srsly, what the point even if Mossad agents can just get in with European passports.
-
I know, srsly, what the point even if Mossad agents can just get in with European passports.
They have no intention of keeping out Mossad. Every country is aware that Mossad will do what they do when they want to, (luckily they haven't in a very long time). The banning of Israelis is a statement against Israelies, not Mossad.
-
Europe bans Israelis?
@ barto: Well I've moderated my views considerably so that Adami and I can at least form a coalition of sorts. :laugh: I do believe in a two-state solution and that there are problems in both countries but I find a good deal of criticism of Israel on an individual basis to be a bit unfair and as part of a double-standard, and that's why I often collude with Adami.
By the way Adami, do you like Aviv Geffen or Eifo HaYeled? I don't think Israeli rock is bad at all, I love both of those and HaYehudim on occasion.
-
My favorite Israeli band has to be Melechesh.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0O5D0A-YHxg
-
Europe bans Israelis?
@ barto: Well I've moderated my views considerably so that Adami and I can at least form a coalition of sorts. :laugh: I do believe in a two-state solution and that there are problems in both countries but I find a good deal of criticism of Israel on an individual basis to be a bit unfair and as part of a double-standard, and that's why I often collude with Adami.
By the way Adami, do you like Aviv Geffen or Eifo HaYeled? I don't think Israeli rock is bad at all, I love both of those and HaYehudim on occasion.
European countries don't ban Israelis, just middle eastern, African and Asian countries (and just some, not all).
And I've never heard of either of those bands. I want to stand firm in my opinion that Israeli rock is terrible (until I make it big) so I will ignore those recommendations in fear that it might change my opinion. :-D
-
How have you not heard of Aviv Geffen? Or are you just being sarcastic?
-
Well, I'd say in my ideal world there are no countries. So, hard to say whether I'd go for Israel or not.
What's up with this?
https://english.aljazeera.net/video/middleeast/2011/04/2011417101015775554.html
-
Well, I'd say in my ideal world there are no countries. So, hard to say whether I'd go for Israel or not.
What's up with this?
https://english.aljazeera.net/video/middleeast/2011/04/2011417101015775554.html
I couldn't watch the video with sound at the moment, but without sound it looked like some kind of prison riot that the troops were responding to. Is that about right? Or were the soldiers just going into a calm prison and starting to shoot everyone?
-
From what I can ascertain, the Israelis launched a "surprise inspection" raid at two in the morning and a riot ensued. One person was killed. I saw several people in that video (no sound here, either) with gunshot wounds to the extremities, so I'd have to say that the Israelis seemed to have exercised some actual restraint. You don't shoot somebody in the calf if you're actually trying to kill him.
I'd be willing to bet that there are a ton of more egregious issues with Israel's detention of political prisoners that merit some outcry. It would seem that a disproportional number of Palestinian prisoners wind up dead in Israel's custody. Certainly a bigger reason for concern than 1 dead from the suppression of a prison riot.
Something that's annoying as all fuck is the difficulty in finding legitimate info about the goings on over there.
-
As a general rule, I don't trust Al Jazeera so you'll have to take that up with Adami.
-
As a general rule, I don't trust Al Jazeera so you'll have to take that up with Adami.
Why not?
-
As a general rule, I don't trust Al Jazeera so you'll have to take that up with Adami.
Despite how bias they are, they're actually a pretty decent place to get news. Al Jazeera is one of the few agencies who will report on things that happen in gaza and the west bank that isn't Israels fault.
-
As a general rule, I don't trust Al Jazeera so you'll have to take that up with Adami.
Despite how bias they are, they're actually a pretty decent place to get news. Al Jazeera is one of the few agencies who will report on things that happen in gaza and the west bank that isn't Israels fault.
Alright I won't begrudge them that, but they did say some pretty nasty (untrue) stuff during the Hezbollah War of '06.
-
Everyone did.
That whole war was basically a very calculated PR campaign by Hezbollah to ensure political take over.
And boy did it work.
-
So the Palestinian state is going to happen, according to Haaretz. I am pro the two-state solution, but happening like this will be very harmful to Israel. Makes me wish something had actually happened at the bargaining table late last year.
-
Neither side will ever win...
-
Yes, but this UN sanctioning could be particularly bad for Israel, especially because it means Palestine gets a seat on the UN Council by default. That means the UN finally has the right of way to try Israel for war crimes for the past 40 years, both real and imagined.
-
Yes, but this UN sanctioning could be particularly bad for Israel, especially because it means Palestine gets a seat on the UN Council by default. That means the UN finally has the right of way to try Israel for war crimes for the past 40 years, both real and imagined.
Will the palestinians get tried for war crimes?
-
Thought that was weird: https://www.haaretz.com/news/national/report-israel-chief-rabbi-says-obama-must-free-pollard-if-he-wants-another-term-1.356383
-
Yes, but this UN sanctioning could be particularly bad for Israel, especially because it means Palestine gets a seat on the UN Council by default. That means the UN finally has the right of way to try Israel for war crimes for the past 40 years, both real and imagined.
Will the palestinians get tried for war crimes?
I don't think so. Is this a loaded question?
-
Yes, but this UN sanctioning could be particularly bad for Israel, especially because it means Palestine gets a seat on the UN Council by default. That means the UN finally has the right of way to try Israel for war crimes for the past 40 years, both real and imagined.
Will the palestinians get tried for war crimes?
I don't think so. Is this a loaded question?
Why would it be a loaded question? I just don't see why the Palestinian governments won't be held accountable for their actions.
-
Probably because of the composition of said UN Council. :P
-
Probably because of the composition of said UN Council. :P
Oh yes, the reality of the situation. Amazing how that keeps getting in the way.
-
Innit? I'm really hoping (and I know it won't happen) that the Israeli leadership will make the following decision: https://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/israel-can-redeem-itself-by-recognizing-a-palestinian-state-1.358756
-
Innit? I'm really hoping (and I know it won't happen) that the Israeli leadership will make the following decision: https://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/israel-can-redeem-itself-by-recognizing-a-palestinian-state-1.358756
At this point the Israeli government is like the bitter old man who will never, under any circumstance, budge.
-
Sooo basically we're fucked.
-
Sooo basically we're fucked.
Yup. Unless Israel has a civil war, and the secularists take over (finally).
-
Which also will probably not happen.
-
Which also will probably not happen.
Grab a galil and a tanach, we're taking over.
-
:lol Yes, we'll establish a government only slightly less polarized than the current regime.
But seriously Adami, you know much more about Israeli politics on the ground than I do. Do you really think it'll come to civil war?
-
:lol Yes, we'll establish a government only slightly less polarized than the current regime.
But seriously Adami, you know much more about Israeli politics on the ground than I do. Do you really think it'll come to civil war?
No, there won't be a civil war. The population is mostly ex military or religious. And even if the military/ex military feel that the power needs to shift, it's not in their personalities to act on it to such an extent.
-
So what do you think will happen?
-
So what do you think will happen?
Business as usual. Israel is pretty untouchable and they know it, they have no reason to back down on anything. So........business as usual.
Lame stuff really.
-
How are they untouchable? U.S. hasn't exactly been nanny lately, and soon enough we won't be able to even if we wanted. And of course the U.N. and E.U. are basically hostile towards Israel by default.
-
How are they untouchable? U.S. hasn't exactly been nanny lately, and soon enough we won't be able to even if we wanted. And of course the U.N. and E.U. are basically hostile towards Israel by default.
If the UN had any power they would have done something.
The Arab nations know that they'd have to realllllllllllllllly get their acts together to take on Israel, which they won't, and it would take all of them in a fully combined effort to make any difference. However by that point, they'd be attacked by America, England and other countries with nukes. So the Arab countries won't touch them either, because just like the UN, they would have already made a move. Well, they did make a move, twice, and they lost both times.
America I guess could take out Israel, but they have no desire to. So unless the world collectively decided to eliminate the Jews (again) Israel is pretty safe.
However, it is unfortunate that this status of being untouchable has corrupted and ruined the country for the most part.
-
How are they untouchable? U.S. hasn't exactly been nanny lately, and soon enough we won't be able to even if we wanted. And of course the U.N. and E.U. are basically hostile towards Israel by default.
If the UN had any power they would have done something.
The Arab nations know that they'd have to realllllllllllllllly get their acts together to take on Israel, which they won't, and it would take all of them in a fully combined effort to make any difference. However by that point, they'd be attacked by America, England and other countries with nukes. So the Arab countries won't touch them either, because just like the UN, they would have already made a move.
I agree with you that far, it's not gonna be during our life time will we see.
So unless the world collectively decided to eliminate the Jews (again) Israel is pretty safe.
What do you mean? Jews will be safe with or without Israel. I think you mean eliminate Zionism.
-
History dictates that Jews aren't safe without Israel.
The amount of current jews in the world is only a little bit more than double the amount hitler killed. We haven't been safe for thousands of years.
-
True dat. That's the reason we tried to return to Israel in the first place.
-
The amount of current jews in the world is only a little bit more than double the amount hitler killed. We haven't been safe for thousands of years.
Well I dunno about the "world" but I think the Jews in America are safe and frankly much happier than the ones in Israel.
-
For now. Anti-Semitism in the U.S. has been increasing since the economic downturn started (although not nearly as much as in Europe), and so has racism in general.
-
The amount of current jews in the world is only a little bit more than double the amount hitler killed. We haven't been safe for thousands of years.
Well I dunno about the "world" but I think the Jews in America are safe and frankly much happier than the ones in Israel.
For now. It's actually quite amazing how fast things can change.
-
Honestly, the only place I'd consider safe for Jews indefinitely is China, if only because history has shown they've only had one incident of violence against Jews ever which was towards the end of the Early Medieval Period (not to mention it was carried out by a rebel faction and no one actually affiliated with the Chinese establishment), and the only official state-sanctioned "anti-semitism" was the state-official atheism of the Communist 20th century which authorized government officials to close down synagogues.
-
Honestly, the only place I'd consider safe for Jews indefinitely is China.... the only official state-sanctioned "anti-semitism" was the state-official atheism of the Communist 20th century which authorized government officials to close down synagogues.
That sounds like a big deal to me.
-
Except now those same synagogues have been re-opened, and the Kaifeng Jews took a pilgrimage to the Great Wall to celebrate Chanukkah this past year. That sounds like a big deal too.
-
Except now those same synagogues have been re-opened, and the Kaifeng Jews took a pilgrimage to the Great Wall to celebrate Chanukkah this past year. That sounds like a big deal too.
That can change at any moment for no reason. China isn't exactly the best place for religious minorities.
-
True, you'd be the one to know. That said, the one violent incident in ancient history and this one government-sanctioned act, compared to what most other nations have done to Jews in the past, is almost like welcoming them with open arms. I can't really speak for other East Asian countries but I know Japan has had worse dealings with the Jews, and the so-called Land of the Free and Home of the Brave...well, just watch Gentlemen's Agreement, that should outline the basics for the time of postwar peace and freedom.
In the modern day no less for example, Brazil is no longer a safe place to be Jewish.
-
Well, Chinese government's been fine by me so far anyway, even though I'm in Hong Kong. But they seem to have a track record of randomly and secretly imprisoning people whilst pretending to embrace their ways :lol
-
No different from Muslims and other brown people living under the Bush Doctrine.
-
:lol
I brought this up with a friend from mainland China during breakfast today. He was telling me that China's a safe place for minorities, and that there aren't really many problems. But he was also telling me that China and Chinese people pretty much as a rule oppose Israel, even if it's in a less than public capacity most of the time.
-
And that's different from every country except the US how?
-
And that's different from every country except the US how?
Well, you're the one that was claiming China was exceptionally kind to Jews or something :biggrin:
-
Well they are okay with Jews, so that still rings true. The problem with Europe for example is that the public is largely anti-Israel just as anti-Semitism has been rising. In the U.S. the public is still largely pro-Israel, but that's been on the wane, and there certainly is anti-Semitism here.
-
What do you mean by anti-semeticism? Like, people joining hate groups? Or just people's general attitudes? Or both?
I'm sure Jews would be welcome in China just as much as any foreigners. But keep in mind that "welcome" /= "right not to be slurred and insulted regularly." You should keep in mind that the person I was talking to this morning about this was the same person who laughed off the fact that I was basically slurred and laughed at on an hourly basis when I was in China for being a white guy. That, to Chinese people, doesn't constitute as bad behavior. It's normal.
So my friend who said "minorities have no problems in China" is leaving out the idea that Americans aren't really used to being called racial slurs and that any minorities going there should expect that regularly.
-
Wow, I had no idea. The Japanese certainly had some tact when I was in their country, although I'm sure there are folks who mutter gaijin under their breath every time they see a tourist walk by.
As for anti-Semitism in the West, it's much easier to point it out in Europe than in America, which, let me put it this way: Jewish schools in Britain are circled by barbed wire. I'm too tired now to get into how it appears in America, but I have a few anecdotes I could share tomorrow. Would anyone else like to pick up the slack though? :p
-
With all due respect guys how many times -just in your life time- have you heard about something like this (https://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/05/01/israel-launches-bid-to-reclaim-holocaust-assets")?
And it always works.
I'm just mentioning this cause you were talking about anti-semitism being on the rise. I don't think it's on the rise at all but if someone does see signs of it and claim that it's unprovoked then we're lying to ourselves.
-
How does this justify anti-Semitism? Germans plain stole stuff from Jews from money to possessions to homes to businesses, and we still haven't nearly reached the point of reclaiming what they took. And honestly I haven't heard of this going on very often.
And how the hell do you justify anti-Semitism at all?
-
I didn't say anything about justification but you have to recognize how radically different other people might view the same issues. Especially when they're so redundant over decades.
-
With all due respect guys how many times -just in your life time- have you heard about something like this (https://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/05/01/israel-launches-bid-to-reclaim-holocaust-assets")?
And it always works.
I'm just mentioning this cause you were talking about anti-semitism being on the rise. I don't think it's on the rise at all but if someone does see signs of it and claim that it's unprovoked then we're lying to ourselves.
WTF?.... really..
and any objective sourcing of news concisley shows its on the rise.. :facepalm:
google the term "antisemitism on the rise" ...take a look..
-
epicview. seriously. you made the claim, so back it up. you've gotta stop telling people to 'just google it'. it's intellectually lazy.
-
https://www.haaretz.com/blogs/a-special-place-in-hell/israel-at-63-what-part-of-shut-up-do-you-not-understand-1.360754
Israel at 63: What part of Shut Up do you not understand?
When, I wonder this Independence Day, did Israelis lose their nerve? These people, who used to be all nerve. When did they opt to be led by sheep?
By Bradley Burston
I love this place. Take it on faith. I do. I cannot explain it even to my own satisfaction. I am not blind to the faults of this place. I have never been anywhere more infuriating, more smugly reckless in action and inaction, more cannibalistic in its official attacks on its own core values, more headstrong in error. Who'd have imagined it, though: love - committed, true, enduring love – turns out to be the opposite of blind. True love, it turns out, winds up seeing it all.
This is what I see this week, this Independence Day:
1. The peoples of Israel and Palestine have rafts more good will, vision, common sense and honest concern for their children and their children's children, than do their leaders.
2. The peoples of Israel and Palestine are led by sheep. Sheep whose primary concern is for their own welfare. Sheep who are being blackmailed by single-minded predators. Predators who trade in fear, intimidation, incitement and radical religious fiat.
3. After 63 years, the peoples of Israel and Palestine believe that they understand one another. They do not. Polls show that the great majority on both sides would like to see two states. Still, traumatized by history, bloodshed, and personal grief, a large segment of each side believes that the other does not. Meanwhile, should there be any progress toward two states, the predators will be right there to slash and burn - if need be, literally.
It is Independence Day, which Israelis will celebrate despite their government, and certainly not because of it. What can you say about a government which since its inception has had but one message for Palestinian and Jew alike, one message for its American allies, for the North American Jewish Community, for the United Nations, for Richard Goldstone and Rick Jacobs, for Tony Kushner and Barack Obama, for Naomi Hazan and Jeremy Ben-Ami:
"What part of Shut Up do you not understand?"
Palestinians are used to the message. They've been getting it for decades. For many Israelis, and Jews as a whole, the message is less familiar. But with every passing week, it is becoming second nature.
The Start Up Nation has somehow acquired the Put Up and Shut Up mode of government, a regime of 19th Century cures for 20th Century afflictions. A regime of obsolete explanations and obdurate, unwarranted self-love, of hijacking democratic tools to serve anti-democratic ends. A regime whose very life is warning Israeli Arabs to shut up about their own history and tragedies, of warning leftist Israeli Jews to shut up about injustice, of warning human rights groups to shut up about morality, of warning asylum seekers to shut up about wanting to be productive citizens, of warning minorities to shut up about living with Jews, of sending the message of shut up and/or leave to non-Orthodox converts to Judaism. A regime, in the end, reduced to granting podiums, salaries and prizes to rabbi-bureaucrats who, in the guise of fearing God, preach segregation, race-hatred, blue-white supremacy, and, above all, fear of peace.
Now, as Independence Day dawns, the government is going after its own. Officials have announced that commemorations for the nation's fallen will not formal honor three firemen who sacrificed their lives trying to save others in the inferno of the Carmel Forest. Turning a deaf ear to public outcry, the officials said they were bound by laws and regulations (which, as any Israeli can tell you, everyone ignores, as officials did when they bent and reversed their decision, then reversed it back, then announced they were forming a committee).
At the same time, the Interior Ministry announced that its controversial new biometric national identity cards would begin with the serial number 6,000,000, to honor the victims of the Holocaust – this as tens of thousands of Holocaust survivors living in Israel have been neglected, forced to subsist on meager food and insufficient nursing care, as officials bickered over and sat on the compensation payments which could have made their lives much more comfortable.
When, I wonder this Independence Day, did Israelis lose their nerve? These people, who used to be all nerve. When did they opt to be led by sheep? Israelis, whose leaders talk about Te'uzah, daring, until their listeners are gray in the face – when did they stop taking risks? These people, my friends, the Israelis, who, when they live abroad or work on start-ups, astound with their flexibility and willingness to improvise, their powers of innovation, their courage of imagination, when did they begin to give up on their own future?
Part of it, of course, is that the same Occupation which ruins the lives of our neighbors, our cousins, the Palestinians, has also rendered Israel bloated and fearful and tainted and dumbed down and callous – and thus fundamentally unable to do anything about the most enduring threat to its own future, the Occupation.
But we know that, whether we do anything about it or not, we are a country in transition. The thought scares us dry. The thought has affected our government like headlights on deer. We know that after September, after a UN roll call over the question of Palestine, we may never be the same country again. And, in the back of our minds lurks the nagging thought that when that happens, we may yet be better off.
There was a time when I wished I had been able to live at the time of hamedina-sh'b'derech, the nation in the making: pre-state Eretz Israel. Little did I know that I would live long enough to experience just that - pre-state Israel.
This, this ungodly mess of ours, this is pre-state Israel. We have no independence. The occupation has reduced us to a suburb of the settlements, a province of Palestine. As it stands, the barriers to our independence, our sovereignty as a democratic state of the Jews are steep: the blackmail of the settlement movement, the enmity of our enemies; the zadon, the ill-will, the low expectations, the unapologetic failure of our government.
Oddly, the most desperate of us, the most frightened, are the leaders of the right. They know that they are one pragmatic Israeli leader away from losing the West Bank. One leader who can face down predators for the common good. One leader less timid than Netanyahu, the sheep, who, when it comes to making peace, can face down neither his wife nor his centenarian father. A senior settler leader said recently that failed in their goal of attracting 650,000 settlers and rendering a Palestinian state impossible. They know that they have altogether failed to sway the Israeli and world Jewish public to their cause. All they've got going for them, at this point, is sheep.
People who know me, know that I have nothing against sheep. In fact, I know them to be intelligent and remarkable, when given a chance, when treated with fairness. They will rise to the occasion. They will act in concert. They will act in cleverness. Left to their own devices, they will do what's best for them. They will even face down predators.
Our neighbors, our cousins the Palestinians, are taking halting but significant steps toward independence. Our neighbors in the Arab world and Iran have shocked and inspired us in the risks they have taken to see societies become what the majority would like to see, not a coterie of strongmen and/or clerics. They scare us because we suddenly realize we know nothing of where all of this is headed. As if we ever did.
I wish the Palestinians well in their quest for a state. And I wish us well in our quest for one of our own. May we learn the difference between blind, rude, arrogant nationalism and true love of country, the desire for a place of safety and freedom for those we love, and peace with neighbors we respect.
Love, as the song says, hurts. It confounds. But it also heals. Take it on faith. In this unknowable pre-state era, both peoples could yet confound us all. On their own. They could at long last do what's best for them. They could take the lead, over these leaders with the wool of politics and position pulled down over their eyes. At long last, these peoples could bend and reverse, and start to heal, and actually become what they so yearn to be. Independent. No longer hostage to predators. Free.
:superdude: says: Adami, do you know if this guy is worth his salt? Because I gotta say, for all that's going down in that area right now, and for all the great potential dangers such a new geopolitics environment could pose to Israel, it would be really fucking great to hear that the majority of citizenry in both countries want a two-state solution and have for a while.
-
He's mostly right. He kind of lost me at Israel being a suburb of palestine, but whatever.
But yea, the problem is the people won't do squat. They want peace, they want a two state solution, but are silenced by the right wing minority who are running the entire country. At this point it has become apathy, the people want peace but are so worn down by the situation and they gave up. It's sad.
-
I see the opposite happening with this UN resolution; I think that will provide the encouragement necessary to mobilize the masses. At least I hope so. 'Cause if all this resentment for the ruling class comes to a boil, this could be the first real bilateral road to peace, namely seeing the leftists of both countries coming together to retake their sovereignty.
All idealist shit, but surely not impossible.
-
Being an Israeli teenager I'd like to thank you all for this very intense, yet very polite discussion. Your involvement in worldwide politics and care for both sides is really touching. Of course we all have different opinions, but I truly believe things like this kind of discussion and involvement will lead us to a way better future, regardless of the tough way there.
I don't want to get too involved around here because this thread really deserves to remain clear of unbiased opinions in my opinion, but I just want to comment on this one thing:
1. The peoples of Israel and Palestine have rafts more good will, vision, common sense and honest concern for their children and their children's children, than do their leaders.
I just want to point out that I personally don't believe in this statement wholeheartedly - our leaders (on both sides) have ton of pressure on their back, limited budget for education, security etc, and especially a very limited space to make decisions. Keep in mind that it's a VERY gentle situation; anything our leaders say, do or decide receives a national reaction and an international reaction. Living in a democratic country, it really limits their possibilities and options, but there's a reason why so many people voted for Netanyahu, and anyone else before him; We all know he cares. We all knew the previous prime ministers cared. We try to feel safe and confident despite the circumstances, and I truly believe our children will do so too in the future.
-
For rock music maybe but Israel is a lead in electronic music.
In 1997 I saw a Dana International on MTV when I was in Egypt and got a boner.
In 1998 Larry King interviewed her and I learned a fact that shocked me so deep I can never trust an Israeli musician again :lol
Yup I mean rock music. Israel is crazy horrible at that, not sure why, maybe it's because all the potential rockers have become rabbis or soldiers.
Damn even Iraq has a heavy metal scene that's worth mentioning.
Yeah, unfortunately. I've only heard of one "popular" Israeli metal band that's worth to point out, Orphaned Land. That's mostly because most people around here appreciate this kind of music: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mizrahi_music
And the rest of us, well, we do fine enough with more international bands like DT :lol
-
Dude don't worry about your opinion being biased; I'm a Diaspora Jew and Adami's a former Israeli.
-
Dude don't worry about your opinion being biased; I'm a Diaspora Jew and Adami's a former Israeli.
GOD DAMNIT I'M STILL ISRAELI!
-
I thought you emigrated?
-
I thought you emigrated?
Yes, but I'm still a citizen and I'm still from there. If you move to Ireland, you're not a former American.
-
I apologize, I didn't mean it like that. I only meant in the sense of being a former resident of Israel.
-
I apologize, I didn't mean it like that. I only meant in the sense of being a former resident of Israel.
Former resident is lovely.
-
Well so much for peace.
-
What happened?
-
What happened?
Palestinians from Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt and Gaza started rioting. Some palestinians rushed the lebanon/israel border and tried to attack/destroy as much as they could. Same thing happened in the Golan Heights, Gaza and partially in Egypt and Jordan. Jordanian police took care of the riots in their country and Egypt took care of the ones in their country, Israel fired at the invading forces and 12 people have been killed. This might be a little hard to spin as a purely "israel is evil" story though, since the people who died were clearly trying to violently rush into the country.
-
So...some good news, I guess.
-
So...some good news, I guess.
None.
The closest to "good" news in there is that Jordan and Egypt didn't help the protestors like Syria did. Nothing else is good about this.
-
And that it'll be hard to paint Israel as the bad guy beyond the usual.
-
And that it'll be hard to paint Israel as the bad guy beyond the usual.
Honestly, with at least 12 Palestinians dead, hundreds of others wounded, at least 1 Israeli dead and others wounded and of course the threat of rising violence, then it really doesn't matter who gets painted as the bad guy.
-
Making Netanyahu's words at the upcoming White House conference all the more critical.
Hey on that note, who was the last PM to have a leftist coalition?
-
Making Netanyahu's words at the upcoming White House conference all the more critical.
Hey on that note, who was the last PM to have a leftist coalition?
Maybe Barak?
-
I wonder if any Palestinians made it inside Israel.
-
I wonder if any Palestinians made it inside Israel.
Yes they did.
Also it seems, that much of the protests were aimed to be non violent with mostly adolescents deciding otherwise. If the overall goal was a non violent protest, then I fully support and cheer them on.
Here's a great article on the matter.
https://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20110516/wl_time/08599207167300
-
Agreed. I'd love to see the Palestinians get a Gandhi/MLKJ-based movement going.
-
Adami, do you read the New York Times? Found this article on Haaretz reporting on Abbass's op-ed there:
https://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/abbas-urges-un-recognize-palestinian-state-pave-way-for-legal-action-against-israel-1.362254
Give it a read through. I actually read the op-ed itself earlier this morning, and Abbass notably omits from the picture of the 1947 solution Palestine's denial of the borders. I dunno about you, but I'm sticking with Israel on this one.
Edit: I'm also really beginning to warm up to Livni.
-
Obama supports 1967 borders Palestine
https://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_theenvoy/20110519/ts_yblog_theenvoy/obama-lays-out-u-s-vision-for-supporting-arab-democracy-resolving-israeli-palestinian-conflict
-
So do I. As a strong supporter of Israel, I consider concessions of this kind to be in the nation's and the world's best interest. As Adami says Israel could be diplomatically invincible, but it's foolish to go on like this. Who really benefits, but the far right and the Israeli and Palestinian electorate?
-
Switch electorate with representatives. :P
-
Has the Israeli government ever made an official statement about what borders they would see as valid for a Palestinian state?
rumborak
-
Has the Israeli government ever made an official statement about what borders they would see as valid for a Palestinian state?
rumborak
They've made offers, but I'm pretty sure it changes somewhat with each new leader. The problem (one of many) we face here is that Benjy doesn't know how to be a peace time prime minister.
-
That is definitely visible to the outside, that Netanyahu isn't really interested in changing the status quo.
rumborak
-
I really wish Livni had gotten it.
-
That is definitely visible to the outside, that Netanyahu isn't really interested in changing the status quo.
rumborak
He has no real goals aside of staying in power. This current situation keeps him in power.
-
I agree.. I wish Benjiman was more like the amazing Abbas and Hamas, those Pal guys are all about peace. The issue is Netenyahu, the nerve of this guy trying to protect Israel. what a dope... dont forget its all about land.. nothing more, if they just had ever single yard they want, utopia would happen. and I mean Egypt is solid , a steadfast friend on the south, dont sweat the Muslim Brotherhood, its just an Arab Spring!!!.. and Lebanon is going fine, no issues there. Syria solid as a rock.. Now is the Time for Israel to just surrender all security that is working
Livni.. yea shes got the answers!!! The problem is the fence is working in Israel and thats gotta be stopped too!! Hudnas all around
Netenyahu.. just surrender it all.. Golan too.. everything.. go back to the 1948 lines.. then it will be peace.
-
I agree.. I wish Benjiman was more like the amazing Abbas and Hamas, those Pal guys are all about peace. The issue is Netenyahu, the nerve of this guy trying to protect Israel. what a dope... dont forget its all about land.. nothing more, if they just had ever single yard they want, utopia would happen. and I mean Egypt is solid , a steadfast friend on the south, dont sweat the Muslim Bortherhood, its just an Arab Spring!!!.. and Lebanon is going fine, no issues there.
Livni.. yea shes got the answers!!!
I would respectfully ask you to stay out of discussing Israel if you lack the ability to do so properly.
-
I agree.. I wish Benjiman was more like the amazing Abbas and Hamas, those Pal guys are all about peace. The issue is Netenyahu, the nerve of this guy trying to protect Israel. what a dope... dont forget its all about land.. nothing more, if they just had ever single yard they want, utopia would happen. and I mean Egypt is solid , a steadfast friend on the south, dont sweat the Muslim Bortherhood, its just an Arab Spring!!!.. and Lebanon is going fine, no issues there.
Livni.. yea shes got the answers!!!
I would respectfully ask you to stay out of discussing Israel if you lack the ability to do so properly.
HUH? Israel needs to go back to the 1948 lines!!! all problems will be solved..thats what the issue is!!
-
That is definitely visible to the outside, that Netanyahu isn't really interested in changing the status quo.
rumborak
He has no real goals aside of staying in power. This current situation keeps him in power.
BTW, why does refer Netanyahu as the 1967 border as "indefensible"? It seems to me that given those borders were UN mandated those considerations were taken into acccount.
rumborak
-
That is definitely visible to the outside, that Netanyahu isn't really interested in changing the status quo.
rumborak
He has no real goals aside of staying in power. This current situation keeps him in power.
BTW, why does refer Netanyahu as the 1967 border as "indefensible"? It seems to me that given those borders were UN mandated those considerations were taken into acccount.
rumborak
I assume it would mean less control. Israel has existed for over 40 years without the 67 borders and has built the defense system around the current borders. Would it ACTUALLY be indefensible? No. It would just mean they'd have to revamp their current defense system, which they should do anyway.
-
That is definitely visible to the outside, that Netanyahu isn't really interested in changing the status quo.
rumborak
He has no real goals aside of staying in power. This current situation keeps him in power.
BTW, why does refer Netanyahu as the 1967 border as "indefensible"? It seems to me that given those borders were UN mandated those considerations were taken into acccount.
rumborak
Golan.
-
That is definitely visible to the outside, that Netanyahu isn't really interested in changing the status quo.
rumborak
He has no real goals aside of staying in power. This current situation keeps him in power.
BTW, why does refer Netanyahu as the 1967 border as "indefensible"? It seems to me that given those borders were UN mandated those considerations were taken into acccount.
rumborak
I assume it would mean less control. Israel has existed for over 40 years without the 67 borders and has built the defense system around the current borders. Would it ACTUALLY be indefensible? No. It would just mean they'd have to revamp their current defense system, which they should do anyway.
I guess Obama's wider point was also that if you are no longer in a military stalemate, you don't need "defensible borders".
rumborak
-
While they don't really need to worry too much about the Palestinians, they do actually need to worry about Syria. Especially right now, if Syria would start a war with Israel, it would help Syria out a whole lot.
-
You really think? It seems Syria has too many inner issues, and a war with another country would rather exacerbate those issues rather than assuage them.
rumborak
-
You really think? It seems Syria has too many inner issues, and a war with another country would rather exacerbate those issues rather than assuage them.
rumborak
Not really. It would give the Syrian people a common enemy with their government. It would serve as a hell of a distraction for the gov of Syria. "Hey...you think WE'RE bad? Look at what Israel is doing!"
How else do you think Syria was able to take over Lebanon unofficially?
-
While they don't really need to worry too much about the Palestinians, they do actually need to worry about Syria. Especially right now, if Syria would start a war with Israel, it would help Syria out a whole lot.
Thats why Israel needs to listen to Obama and give the Golan back( thats the 1967 border).. that will help Israel's security to give up that strategic land.!! Syria is solid.! 1967 borders are perfect!! The time is now if not sooner to go back to the 1967 border.Netnayahu is just wasting time to not hand it over, Benji is looking for a conflict as he is not a good peace time PM, thats why he wont hand it back now
-
While they don't really need to worry too much about the Palestinians, they do actually need to worry about Syria. Especially right now, if Syria would start a war with Israel, it would help Syria out a whole lot.
Thats why Israel needs to listen to Obama and give the Golan back.. that will help Israel's security to give up that strategic land.!! Syria is solid. Obama has no worries about it!! 1967 borders are perfect!! The time is now if not sooner to go back to the 1967 border.Netnayahu is just wasting time to not hand it over, Benji is looking for a conflict as he is not a good peace time PM, thats why he wont hand it back now
If you don't stop, I am going to report you.
-
While they don't really need to worry too much about the Palestinians, they do actually need to worry about Syria. Especially right now, if Syria would start a war with Israel, it would help Syria out a whole lot.
Thats why Israel needs to listen to Obama and give the Golan back.. that will help Israel's security to give up that strategic land.!! Syria is solid. Obama has no worries about it!! 1967 borders are perfect!! The time is now if not sooner to go back to the 1967 border.Netnayahu is just wasting time to not hand it over, Benji is looking for a conflict as he is not a good peace time PM, thats why he wont hand it back now
If you don't stop, I am going to report you.
again? huh?? the Golan is a real issue, Syria wants it back before any talks can take place( well documented) Im dealing in facts! and thats part of the 1967 border that Obama has made a subject. are we not free to talk on the subject? or to state how one feels about the subject? Rumboroak asked about why the term "Indefensible borders and 1967" are being said by Benji and are confusing, and thats the issue..the Golan Heights, but its not being talked about as part of the issue on most news. Lets hope he gives it back! Ehud Barak Im sure would agree. and Israel needs him as PM I think
-
You really think? It seems Syria has too many inner issues, and a war with another country would rather exacerbate those issues rather than assuage them.
rumborak
Not really. It would give the Syrian people a common enemy with their government. It would serve as a hell of a distraction for the gov of Syria. "Hey...you think WE'RE bad? Look at what Israel is doing!"
How else do you think Syria was able to take over Lebanon unofficially?
I see your point, but I can also see it going both ways. Especially since Israel hasn't done any outright act of hostility lately, I would think the Syrian public could also use an unnecessary war as yet another reason to topple the government.
rumborak
-
You really think? It seems Syria has too many inner issues, and a war with another country would rather exacerbate those issues rather than assuage them.
rumborak
Not really. It would give the Syrian people a common enemy with their government. It would serve as a hell of a distraction for the gov of Syria. "Hey...you think WE'RE bad? Look at what Israel is doing!"
How else do you think Syria was able to take over Lebanon unofficially?
I see your point, but I can also see it going both ways. Especially since Israel hasn't done any outright act of hostility lately, I would think the Syrian public could also use an unnecessary war as yet another reason to topple the government.
rumborak
I'm just telling you how things generally work down there. Getting into a war with Israel is the best possible decision for a country who's people are getting pissed off at their government. Usually though it's not a direct war, which is why groups like Hamas and Hezbollah exist, if real armies attacked Israel, it would be a bad PR move, but since neither group is an official army, then when they attack Israel, no country has to take direct responsibility and can claim to be the victim.
-
While they don't really need to worry too much about the Palestinians, they do actually need to worry about Syria. Especially right now, if Syria would start a war with Israel, it would help Syria out a whole lot.
Thats why Israel needs to listen to Obama and give the Golan back.. that will help Israel's security to give up that strategic land.!! Syria is solid. Obama has no worries about it!! 1967 borders are perfect!! The time is now if not sooner to go back to the 1967 border.Netnayahu is just wasting time to not hand it over, Benji is looking for a conflict as he is not a good peace time PM, thats why he wont hand it back now
If you don't stop, I am going to report you.
In the future Adami, just report it. You don't need to tell anyone off.
As for EPICVIEW, he really didn't do anything wrong. I mean, he's no expert on Israel, but he didn't say anything out of line.
-
Oh I know, that's why I didn't report it. He just wasn't adding anything to the discussion with his sarcastic overly biased replies. I figured maybe he'd assume I was in the mossad and would be scared.
-
Adami. I think you'd like to read what Gene Simmons thinks about the 1967 border.
https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/kiss-rocker-gives-kiss-obamas-israeli-bo
-
Maybe Obama doesn't care about the Golan borders since he was talking 1967 borders in the context of the Palestinian state?
-
Maybe Obama doesn't care about the Golan borders since he was talking 1967 borders in the context of the Palestinian state?
A fair point since the Palestinians have no claim in the slightest to Golan.
-
again, Obama stated Israel needs to go back to the 1967 borders...that includes the Golan., hence why Bneji said its "indefensible".. pretty obvious stuff..this is an old subject, and the Jordan Valley of course
I say Israel should go back to the 1948 borders that Hamas is now stating that they want, and Israel as per Obama will need to negotiate with Hamas. Hamas knows 1967 borders are already done as far as it being theirs, so now 1948 is on the table, or connecting the country between Gaza and the West Bank with land from Israel ( thats the swap...)
that way Israels water supply can be regualated by Hamas-Fatah. even under the 1967 borders.
I scratch my head why this is not obvious stuff to anyone who studies these subjects for 30 years like me
-
Anyway, as far as I know Obama said the Palestinian state should be based on the 1967 borders, but the Palestinian state has nothing to do with Golan.
-
I scratch my head why this is not obvious stuff to anyone who studies these subjects for 30 years like me
You just had to ruin your brilliantly sarcastic post by drawing attention to your superiority over all us laymen, didn't you?
-
Eh, I took it as his way to validate his sarcastic post.
-
I scratch my head why this is not obvious stuff to anyone who studies these subjects for 30 years like me
You just had to ruin your brilliantly sarcastic post by drawing attention to your superiority over all us laymen, didn't you?
As with any troll, it's best we just ignore it. :)
-
Epicview has a point though. Why would Israel want to give back the Golan Heights? It's not like there were a lot of Syrians there when Israel took over. Some of them probably got Israeli citizenship and are quite happy. From what I hear the Syrian military was shelling Israel every day when they had the territory.
-
I don't think that's what he meant. I think he was rather using "1967" as the amount of land that Palestine should have.
rumborak
-
I have no idea what's going on here, and Wiki isn't helping. Who can give me the cliff-notes version?
-
I have no idea what's going on here, and Wiki isn't helping. Who can give me the cliff-notes version?
Hi PC, what topic would you like to discuss that is confusing you?
I watched Benji at AIPAC last night.. I so wish he would just give up, and call for early elections in Israel, Hamas is not a big fan of Benjis.
-
I don't get the issue with the boundary, and when I read headlines like "Blah blah blah 1967 blah blah blah" I don't even bother reading the article because that sort of information about dates and stuff means absolutely nothing to me.
-
I don't get the issue with the boundary, and when I read headlines like "Blah blah blah 1967 blah blah blah" I don't even bother reading the article because that sort of information about dates and stuff means absolutely nothing to me.
Obama has stated that he is changing all prior US positions , verbally supporting the non defensible pre 1967 Israelis border, its been a huge topic in the American media,. Obama has gone back on the prior commtiments by congress that GWB put forward to allow this policy of support of Israels view that the 1967 borders can not be negotiated outside of Israel, that congress voted 95-0 in 100% support of Israel in 2004. but Obama decided that he wont suppor that, and that an agreement with an ally, and that American iron clad long standing policy is really worthless with Obama. Obama handed Hamas-Fatah what they wanted without having to give up anything. So Fatah briging in Hamas is not even an issue..
the 1967 borders are in refernece tot he 6 day war that Israel was attacked on, and that Israel took land after being attacked. Egypt negotiated peace with Saddat to get the return of Sanai..Israel got not much in that agreement, a cold peace at best
-
I don't get the issue with the boundary, and when I read headlines like "Blah blah blah 1967 blah blah blah" I don't even bother reading the article because that sort of information about dates and stuff means absolutely nothing to me.
During the 6 Day war in '67, Israel annexed several chunks of land, including the Gaza Strip, the West Bank of the River Jordan, part of Jerusalem, and The Golan Heights. Obama apparently thinks they should give them back now. Netanyahu says they're vital to the defense of Israel. The Golan Heights is a highly strategic border territory with Syria, which still doesn't recognize Israel's right to exist, so he's probably right about that one.
-
I don't get the issue with the boundary, and when I read headlines like "Blah blah blah 1967 blah blah blah" I don't even bother reading the article because that sort of information about dates and stuff means absolutely nothing to me.
During the 6 Day war in '67, Israel annexed several chunks of land, including the Gaza Strip, the West Bank of the River Jordan, part of Jerusalem, and The Golan Heights. Obama apparently thinks they should give them back now. Netanyahu says they're vital to the defense of Israel. The Golan Heights is a highly strategic border territory with Syria, which still doesn't recognize Israel's right to exist, so he's probably right about that one.
well said EB, I almost said the same thing at the same time!
-
Once more, Obama said the Palestinian state should be drawn along the 1967 borders. That has nothing to do with Golan, nothing at all.
-
the 1967 borders are in refernece tot he 6 day war that Israel wa attacked on
You supposedly spent 30 years "researching" this topic, and then claim Israel was attacked first? Dude, even Israel conceded that they instigated it, calling it a "preemptive measure". Whether it was justifiable might be a topic of controversy, but what credence can we give to your ramblings if you can't even get the most basic facts straight?
rumborak
-
the 1967 borders are in refernece tot he 6 day war that Israel wa attacked on
You supposedly spent 30 years "researching" this topic, and then claim Israel was attacked first? Dude, even Israel conceded that they instigated it, calling it a "preemptive measure".
rumborak
To be fair, they had good reason. It wasn't exactly "hey what do you wanna do today?" "I dunno.....how about we bomb egypt?"
-
To be fair, they had good reason. It wasn't exactly "hey what do you wanna do today?" "I dunno.....how about we bomb egypt?"
That might be so (see Ninja edit above :lol), but EV seems to dispute the fact that Israel struck first.
rumborak
-
To be fair, they had good reason. It wasn't exactly "hey what do you wanna do today?" "I dunno.....how about we bomb egypt?"
That might be so (see Ninja edit above :lol), but EV seems to dispute the fact that Israel struck first.
rumborak
Ah yes indeed. Israel without a doubt struck first.
-
I'm certainly not saying that the strike was without previous provocations or that Israel didn't themselves see this as a (extreme but necessary) measure to change the direction of the conflict, but reality of it is also that Israel used this strike for a massive land grab that didn't belong to them under the UN mandate, and which displaced the Palestinians. If Obama says the amount of land attributed to the Palestinians needs to be closer to the amount around 1967, I can see his reasoning.
rumborak
-
I'm certainly not saying that the strike was without previous provocations or that Israel didn't themselves see this as a (extreme but necessary) measure to change the direction of the conflict, but reality of it is also that Israel used this strike for a massive land grab that didn't belong to them under the UN mandate, and which displaced the Palestinians. If Obama says the amount of land attributed to the Palestinians needs to be closer to the amount around 1967, I can see his reasoning.
rumborak
I don't think Israel struck egypt in order to take land for Jordan. I think Israel just took advantage of a huge war, like any country really would. What's ironic though is that the land designated for "Palestine" wasn't originally part of the 48 mandate and were simply parts of Egypt and Jordan.
-
I scratch my head why this is not obvious stuff to anyone who studies these subjects for 30 years like me
You just had to ruin your brilliantly sarcastic post by drawing attention to your superiority over all us laymen, didn't you?
As with any troll, it's best we just ignore it. :)
Dude, you can't call someone a troll just because you don't like or agree with their opinions. Sure he clearly has a lot of controversial things to say on this subject, but he also clearly takes it seriously.
-
the 1967 borders are in refernece tot he 6 day war that Israel wa attacked on
You supposedly spent 30 years "researching" this topic, and then claim Israel was attacked first? Dude, even Israel conceded that they instigated it, calling it a "preemptive measure". Whether it was justifiable might be a topic of controversy, but what credence can we give to your ramblings if you can't even get the most basic facts straight?
rumborak
again.. you are incorrect... shocking.
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/67_War.html
Syria’s attacks on Israeli kibbutzim from the Golan Heights finally provoked a retaliatory strike on April 7, 1967. During the attack, Israeli planes shot down six Syrian fighter planes — MiGs supplied by the Soviet Union. Shortly thereafter, the Soviets — who had been providing military and economic assistance to both Syria and Egypt — gave Damascus false information alleging a massive Israeli military buildup in preparation for an attack. Despite Israeli denials, Syria decided to invoke its defense treaty with Egypt and asked Nasser to come to its aid.
-
I don't think Obama mentioned Jerusalem though. That's kind of like the most difficult part about this conflict.
-
I'm certainly not saying that the strike was without previous provocations or that Israel didn't themselves see this as a (extreme but necessary) measure to change the direction of the conflict, but reality of it is also that Israel used this strike for a massive land grab that didn't belong to them under the UN mandate, and which displaced the Palestinians. If Obama says the amount of land attributed to the Palestinians needs to be closer to the amount around 1967, I can see his reasoning.
rumborak
I don't think Israel struck egypt in order to take land for Jordan. I think Israel just took advantage of a huge war, like any country really would. What's ironic though is that the land designated for "Palestine" wasn't originally part of the 48 mandate and were simply parts of Egypt and Jordan.
Oh, I agree, I don't think Israel set out thinking they might end up with a nice chunk of extra land at the end of it. As you said, after all was said and done, they found themselves occupying certain areas they would have liked for themselves.
But, frankly, a military outcome can't be the legal basis for countries' borders. Otherwise, Germany would still have Alsace (which we don't, because we had to give it back to France after WWII).
rumborak
-
I don't think Obama mentioned Jerusalem though. That's kind of like the most difficult part about this conflict.
He did.. his flip flop is well documented.
-
I'm certainly not saying that the strike was without previous provocations or that Israel didn't themselves see this as a (extreme but necessary) measure to change the direction of the conflict, but reality of it is also that Israel used this strike for a massive land grab that didn't belong to them under the UN mandate, and which displaced the Palestinians. If Obama says the amount of land attributed to the Palestinians needs to be closer to the amount around 1967, I can see his reasoning.
rumborak
I don't think Israel struck egypt in order to take land for Jordan. I think Israel just took advantage of a huge war, like any country really would. What's ironic though is that the land designated for "Palestine" wasn't originally part of the 48 mandate and were simply parts of Egypt and Jordan.
Oh, I agree, I don't think Israel set out thinking they might end up with a nice chunk of extra land at the end of it. As you said, after all was said and done, they found themselves occupying certain areas they would have liked for themselves.
But, frankly, a military outcome can't be the legal basis for countries' borders. Otherwise, Germany would still have Alsace (which we don't, because we had to give it back to France after WWII).
rumborak
Well lots of countries would lose their borders if military conquest wasn't enough to define it.
-
the 1967 borders are in refernece tot he 6 day war that Israel wa attacked on
You supposedly spent 30 years "researching" this topic, and then claim Israel was attacked first? Dude, even Israel conceded that they instigated it, calling it a "preemptive measure". Whether it was justifiable might be a topic of controversy, but what credence can we give to your ramblings if you can't even get the most basic facts straight?
rumborak
again.. you are incorrect... shocking.
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/67_War.html
Just FYI, I have no interest in discussing this with you. I am not surprised you find an online document that disputes historical fact.
rumborak
-
Well lots of countries would lose their borders if military conquest wasn't enough to define it.
Yeah, that's where the tricky part comes in :lol It's definitely true that almost all border were defined through military conquest.
That said, I think the Palestinians also need a place to live, and that the current area is heavily biased towards Israel, as an outcome of 1967. For a real lasting peace to happen, Israel needs to concede land. Otherwise you'll just have continuing skirmishes.
rumborak
-
the 1967 borders are in refernece tot he 6 day war that Israel wa attacked on
You supposedly spent 30 years "researching" this topic, and then claim Israel was attacked first? Dude, even Israel conceded that they instigated it, calling it a "preemptive measure". Whether it was justifiable might be a topic of controversy, but what credence can we give to your ramblings if you can't even get the most basic facts straight?
rumborak
again.. you are incorrect... shocking.
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/67_War.html
Syria’s attacks on Israeli kibbutzim from the Golan Heights finally provoked a retaliatory strike on April 7, 1967. During the attack, Israeli planes shot down six Syrian fighter planes — MiGs supplied by the Soviet Union. Shortly thereafter, the Soviets — who had been providing military and economic assistance to both Syria and Egypt — gave Damascus false information alleging a massive Israeli military buildup in preparation for an attack. Despite Israeli denials, Syria decided to invoke its defense treaty with Egypt and asked Nasser to come to its aid.
Hey epicview, do you bother reading your own articles?
By this time, Israeli forces had been on alert for three weeks. The country could not remain fully mobilized indefinitely, nor could it allow its sea lane through the Gulf of Aqaba to be interdicted. Israel decided to preempt the expected Arab attack. To do this successfully, Israel needed the element of surprise. Had it waited for an Arab invasion, Israel would have been at a potentially catastrophic disadvantage. On June 5, Prime Minister Eshkol gave the order to attack Egypt.
-
:lol
-
Well lots of countries would lose their borders if military conquest wasn't enough to define it.
Yeah, that's where the tricky part comes in :lol It's definitely true that almost all border were defined through military conquest.
That said, I think the Palestinians also need a place to live, and that the current area is heavily biased towards Israel, as an outcome of 1967. For a real lasting peace to happen, Israel needs to concede land. Otherwise you'll just have continuing skirmishes.
rumborak
I agree. Give back all of the west bank (and by give back, I mean make it palestinian...which isn't really giving back, but giving), and make Jerusalem a UN run city, with no country laying claim to it. The problem then becomes how do you make Gaza and The West Bank a country? It would be like if Texas and Virginia decide to become their own country, it's odd.
-
Also, if anyone is watching Benji is giving a horrible speech about peace. So far (Although I did come in late), he has mentioned how happy the Arab Israelis are, how Iran is going to destroy the world, and the holocaust. Good god.
-
the 1967 borders are in refernece tot he 6 day war that Israel wa attacked on
You supposedly spent 30 years "researching" this topic, and then claim Israel was attacked first? Dude, even Israel conceded that they instigated it, calling it a "preemptive measure". Whether it was justifiable might be a topic of controversy, but what credence can we give to your ramblings if you can't even get the most basic facts straight?
rumborak
again.. you are incorrect... shocking.
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/67_War.html
Syria’s attacks on Israeli kibbutzim from the Golan Heights finally provoked a retaliatory strike on April 7, 1967. During the attack, Israeli planes shot down six Syrian fighter planes — MiGs supplied by the Soviet Union. Shortly thereafter, the Soviets — who had been providing military and economic assistance to both Syria and Egypt — gave Damascus false information alleging a massive Israeli military buildup in preparation for an attack. Despite Israeli denials, Syria decided to invoke its defense treaty with Egypt and asked Nasser to come to its aid.
Hey epicview, do you bother reading your own articles?
By this time, Israeli forces had been on alert for three weeks. The country could not remain fully mobilized indefinitely, nor could it allow its sea lane through the Gulf of Aqaba to be interdicted. Israel decided to preempt the expected Arab attack. To do this successfully, Israel needed the element of surprise. Had it waited for an Arab invasion, Israel would have been at a potentially catastrophic disadvantage. On June 5, Prime Minister Eshkol gave the order to attack Egypt.
Uh..yea I did.. did you? or do you just have selective reading skillz? What I mentioned was an attack on Israel that started the process of war.... pretty well known stuff.....
and that this Rumbarak wants to call history' subjective online BS" does not make the facts in the article incorrect, Those MIGS were shot down over Israeli airspace in an act of war. after attacks onto Israel proper from the Golan
-
Well lots of countries would lose their borders if military conquest wasn't enough to define it.
Yeah, that's where the tricky part comes in :lol It's definitely true that almost all border were defined through military conquest.
That said, I think the Palestinians also need a place to live, and that the current area is heavily biased towards Israel, as an outcome of 1967. For a real lasting peace to happen, Israel needs to concede land. Otherwise you'll just have continuing skirmishes.
rumborak
I agree. Give back all of the west bank (and by give back, I mean make it palestinian...which isn't really giving back, but giving), and make Jerusalem a UN run city, with no country laying claim to it. The problem then becomes how do you make Gaza and The West Bank a country? It would be like if Texas and Virginia decide to become their own country, it's odd.
Yeah, I've been pondering that too. But, look at post-war West Berlin. It was a part of Western Germany for 50 years even though it was embedded inside a Communist country. As long as an agreement of safe and unlimited transport through the "hosting" country is established, it can be done.
rumborak
-
Also, if anyone is watching Benji is giving a horrible speech about peace. So far (Although I did come in late), he has mentioned how happy the Arab Israelis are, how Iran is going to destroy the world, and the holocaust. Good god.
I know.. The Jews are much happier in Saudi Arabia and Egypt, then an Arab in Israel.. Benji is a dope. Lets hope Israel adopts their policies of equality for all.
-
Also, if anyone is watching Benji is giving a horrible speech about peace. So far (Although I did come in late), he has mentioned how happy the Arab Israelis are, how Iran is going to destroy the world, and the holocaust. Good god.
I know.. The Jews are much happier in Saudi Arabia and Egypt, then an Arab in Israel.. Benji is a dope
Stop it. Just stop it. Remember when you said you weren't going to post in PR anymore?
-
I'm also pretty tired of EV junking up an otherwise very interesting and level-headed discussion.
rumborak
-
Ok now he's talking about how God gave the jews the land. This isn't going very well at all.
-
Ok now he's talking about how God gave the jews the land. This isn't going very well at all.
its not?
-
Ok now he's talking about how God gave the jews the land. This isn't going very well at all.
its not?
No, so far his speech for "peace" has mentioned Iran destroying the world, the holocaust, God giving Jews all of the land, and the Palestinians being 100% to blame for everything. Nothing is going well so far in this speech, but it's pretty predictable.
-
Ok now he's talking about how God gave the jews the land. This isn't going very well at all.
its not?
No, so far his speech for "peace" has mentioned Iran destroying the world, the holocaust, God giving Jews all of the land, and the Palestinians being 100% to blame for everything. Nothing is going well so far in this speech, but it's pretty predictable.
of course.. Benji knows nobody is going to stick up for Israel but him, he has a job to do. I saw an interesting poll that showed like 80% of the USA supports Israel and Benji over Obamas position
-
Right now his job is to help make peace. He's not doing his job.
-
Right now his job is to help make peace. He's not doing his job.
debatable..
His job is the protection of his people.. if peace is that vehicle then let it be. if not Israel will have to do what it needs to do, whatever that is in todays volitile ME
-
Did I misunderstand him, or did he suggest that the Palestinian state would have to allow unlimited Jewish immigration?
rumborak
-
The best way to defend against a war is to end it.
@Rumby, that's what I heard too. Not sure what he meant, maybe he misspoke?
-
Man, yeah, he can only think in terms of war. And the Republicans have one collective boner right now.
rumborak
-
The best way to defend against a war is to end it.
@Rumby, that's what I heard too. Not sure what he meant, maybe he misspoke?
He did not mispeak. very simply if a Jew wants to stay there, they will need to be allowed to become a palestinian, and live there, rather then migrate back to Israel via being expelled from their dwelling..who knows how many will want to.
-
Man, yeah, he can only think in terms of war. And the Republicans have one collective boner right now.
rumborak
its called a "deterent" .. is this posturing so amzingly difficult to understand.. The fear of use of force can be used as a vehicle for peace..
all he is saying is " mess around and you will be destroyed" and its more at Iran
-
Well aside from his ramblings about Iran and the Holocaust, I think his entire speech can be summed up in 2 words.
NO COMPROMISE.
-
The best way to defend against a war is to end it.
@Rumby, that's what I heard too. Not sure what he meant, maybe he misspoke?
He did not mispeak. very simply if a Jew wants to stay there, they will need to be allowed to become a palestinian, and live there, rather then migrate back to Israel via being expelled from their dwelling..who knows how many will want to.
Every heard of a country's sovereignty? Palestine will have to be able to decide who they let immigrate or not. Imposing this on Palestine is just a covert way of continuing the settlements.
rumborak
-
Well aside from his ramblings about Iran and the Holocaust, I think his entire speech can be summed up in 2 words.
NO COMPROMISE.
creating leverage.. smart
-
Well aside from his ramblings about Iran and the Holocaust, I think his entire speech can be summed up in 2 words.
NO COMPROMISE.
creating leverage.. smart
Yea, it's worked well so far.
-
The best way to defend against a war is to end it.
@Rumby, that's what I heard too. Not sure what he meant, maybe he misspoke?
He did not mispeak. very simply if a Jew wants to stay there, they will need to be allowed to become a palestinian, and live there, rather then migrate back to Israel via being expelled from their dwelling..who knows how many will want to.
Every heard of a country's sovereignty? Palestine will have to be able to decide who they let immigrate or not. Imposing this on Palestine is just a covert way of continuing the settlements.
rumborak
so then Israel will be expel whover they decide also.. since they are sovereign. again, this was Benjis way of saying,"You dont let them stay we will expel also"
-
Well aside from his ramblings about Iran and the Holocaust, I think his entire speech can be summed up in 2 words.
NO COMPROMISE.
creating leverage.. smart
Yea, it's worked well so far.
It has..Israel still exists.. so I guess its a matter of what one thinks is "working"
-
Peace is working, war is not working.
-
Peace is working, war is not working.
How do you think the northen border of Israel will end up? with peace? or with another war?
but dont think I and most people of the world dont want it to be peace!!, but realistically radical Islam is on the march. Israel cant let its guard down for a piece of paper which is worthless.. like we today with Egypt, those agreements may not be valid anymore... and unless the Fatah Hamas Charter is changed.. then really whats it worth..? a hudna? so what..
-
For those seeking sparknotes on the conflict: mideastweb.org
-
Adami: having dealt now with EV the last few pages, am I so bad? :lol
-
Adami: having dealt now with EV the last few pages, am I so bad? :lol
No, you're not strictly sarcastic 90% of the time.
-
Sorry to have to repeat myself, but can people stop taking digs at Epicview? Disagree with him all you like, but he is posting in a perfectly civilised manner so can everyone stop making it personal please.
-
Thanks for EB and EV for clearing this issue up for me.
I also find it a bit strange that people are jumping down EV's throat for his opposition to this. Do the pro-Israeli's here aside from Epic actually agree with Obama's stance? I find that a bit surprising.
Also, it looks like the Adami of days gone by has returned. Welcome back, old Adami :)
-
I suspect the problem was with the incessant sarcasm; not the opinion.
-
I suspect the problem was with the incessant sarcasm; not the opinion.
Adami has issues with incessant sarcasm? :lol
;) ;) ;)
-
Thanks for EB and EV for clearing this issue up for me.
I also find it a bit strange that people are jumping down EV's throat for his opposition to this. Do the pro-Israeli's here aside from Epic actually agree with Obama's stance? I find that a bit surprising.
Also, it looks like the Adami of days gone by has returned. Welcome back, old Adami :)
Youre welcome.. anytime PC.
Have a great day!!
-
Come now Adami, I'm not that insanely defensive of Israel, as defensive as I can be (and only when there's been an incident at that).
-
Thanks for EB and EV for clearing this issue up for me.
I also find it a bit strange that people are jumping down EV's throat for his opposition to this. Do the pro-Israeli's here aside from Epic actually agree with Obama's stance? I find that a bit surprising.
Also, it looks like the Adami of days gone by has returned. Welcome back, old Adami :)
I suspect the problem was with the incessant sarcasm; not the opinion.
Adami has issues with incessant sarcasm? :lol
;) ;) ;)
I know you are not fond of me in the least, but the "old" me as you put it was goofy 24/7 and rude and sarcastic. I am trying to be proper, it was difficult dealing with EVs constant sarcasm, that is all.
In short, I used to be a prick. So if you think I'm being a prick again, I'll just stop posting for a while.
-
You're not a prick, don't stop posting.
-
the 1967 borders are in refernece tot he 6 day war that Israel wa attacked on
You supposedly spent 30 years "researching" this topic, and then claim Israel was attacked first? Dude, even Israel conceded that they instigated it, calling it a "preemptive measure". Whether it was justifiable might be a topic of controversy, but what credence can we give to your ramblings if you can't even get the most basic facts straight?
rumborak
again.. you are incorrect... shocking.
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/67_War.html
Syria’s attacks on Israeli kibbutzim from the Golan Heights finally provoked a retaliatory strike on April 7, 1967. During the attack, Israeli planes shot down six Syrian fighter planes — MiGs supplied by the Soviet Union. Shortly thereafter, the Soviets — who had been providing military and economic assistance to both Syria and Egypt — gave Damascus false information alleging a massive Israeli military buildup in preparation for an attack. Despite Israeli denials, Syria decided to invoke its defense treaty with Egypt and asked Nasser to come to its aid.
Hey epicview, do you bother reading your own articles?
By this time, Israeli forces had been on alert for three weeks. The country could not remain fully mobilized indefinitely, nor could it allow its sea lane through the Gulf of Aqaba to be interdicted. Israel decided to preempt the expected Arab attack. To do this successfully, Israel needed the element of surprise. Had it waited for an Arab invasion, Israel would have been at a potentially catastrophic disadvantage. On June 5, Prime Minister Eshkol gave the order to attack Egypt.
Uh..yea I did.. did you? or do you just have selective reading skillz? What I mentioned was an attack on Israel that started the process of war.... pretty well known stuff.....
and that this Rumbarak wants to call history' subjective online BS" does not make the facts in the article incorrect, Those MIGS were shot down over Israeli airspace in an act of war. after attacks onto Israel proper from the Golan
Except we were talking about the war itself. Not a separate skirmish that came before. Ultimately Israel started the conflict
-
It seems the majority of Israelis aren't as hawkish as Benny
https://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2011/May-25/Israel-PM-should-have-said-yes-to-Obama-poll.ashx#axzz1NLwqfMYZ
-
Indeed they're not. Look at the pages before the Nakba day riot and Adami and I were saying how we wish those people were in power and not the religious right. That said, Hamas' continued refusal to acknowledge Israel and refuse peace, and the disturbing refusal to acknowledge the Palestinian role in 1948 (as evidenced by Abbas's NYT op-ed) is leaning my opinions somewhat rightward lately.
-
the 1967 borders are in refernece tot he 6 day war that Israel wa attacked on
You supposedly spent 30 years "researching" this topic, and then claim Israel was attacked first? Dude, even Israel conceded that they instigated it, calling it a "preemptive measure". Whether it was justifiable might be a topic of controversy, but what credence can we give to your ramblings if you can't even get the most basic facts straight?
rumborak
again.. you are incorrect... shocking.
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/67_War.html
Syria’s attacks on Israeli kibbutzim from the Golan Heights finally provoked a retaliatory strike on April 7, 1967. During the attack, Israeli planes shot down six Syrian fighter planes — MiGs supplied by the Soviet Union. Shortly thereafter, the Soviets — who had been providing military and economic assistance to both Syria and Egypt — gave Damascus false information alleging a massive Israeli military buildup in preparation for an attack. Despite Israeli denials, Syria decided to invoke its defense treaty with Egypt and asked Nasser to come to its aid.
Hey epicview, do you bother reading your own articles?
By this time, Israeli forces had been on alert for three weeks. The country could not remain fully mobilized indefinitely, nor could it allow its sea lane through the Gulf of Aqaba to be interdicted. Israel decided to preempt the expected Arab attack. To do this successfully, Israel needed the element of surprise. Had it waited for an Arab invasion, Israel would have been at a potentially catastrophic disadvantage. On June 5, Prime Minister Eshkol gave the order to attack Egypt.
Uh..yea I did.. did you? or do you just have selective reading skillz? What I mentioned was an attack on Israel that started the process of war.... pretty well known stuff.....
and that this Rumbarak wants to call history' subjective online BS" does not make the facts in the article incorrect, Those MIGS were shot down over Israeli airspace in an act of war. after attacks onto Israel proper from the Golan
Except we were talking about the war itself. Not a separate skirmish that came before. Ultimately Israel started the conflict
Incorrect. Lets be real and be adults, the "Six Day War" was not Six days!!! Ultimately, The conflict was started by the enemies of Israel, Israel made a strategic move after being attacked, that started what really should be called "Six days" it took to have the enemy surrender. The War itself was already under way.. much like the Northen Border of Israel and Lebanon, today. Hezbollah is in a declared war as we speak.. did you know that? The conflict of agression by Russia and Syria and the attacks into Israels air space and the deaths of Israeis as I showed were the provocation that Israel called the final straw, and Syria and Egypt knew that and amassed on the borders. history shows this succinctly.
https://www.golansights.com/history.html
in April 1967, after Syria heavily shelled Israeli villages from the Golan Heights, Israel shot down six of Syria’s MiG fighter planes, provided by the Soviet Union. Israel warned Syria against future attacks.
Before the Six-Day War, the strategic heights of the Golan, which are approximately 3,000 feet (1,000 m) above the bordering Hulah Valley in Israel, were used to frequently bombard civilian Israeli farming communities far below them. Syrian attacks killed 140 Israelis and injured many more from 1949 to 1967.
In May 1967 before the Six-Day War of 1967, Hafez Assad, then Syria's Defense Minister declared: "Our forces are now entirely ready not only to repulse the aggression, but to initiate the act of liberation itself, and to explode the Zionist presence in the Arab homeland. The Syrian Army, with its finger on the trigger, is united... I, as a military man, believe that the time has come to enter into a battle of annihilation." ( thats called a declaration of War)
During the Six-Day War of 1967 Syria's shelling greatly intensified and the Israeli army captured the Golan Heights on 9–10 June. The area which came under Israeli control as a result of the war is two geologically distinct areas: the Golan Heights proper (413 sq mi; 1,070 km²) and the slopes of the Mt. Hermon range (39 sq mi; 100 km²). The new border between the two forces was called the Purple Line.
-
Can somebody explain to me why the U.S. supports Israel so much? I know the two are allies, but why the commitment no matter what? The public that support Israel seem to be either evangelical Christians or Islamophobes. But religiosity can't explain it all. Does the U.S. feel bad that it didn't accept enough Jewish immigrants during WWII? Seems like that guilt should be left to the Europeans though. Is it about politicians getting money from AIPAC? Is it just geopolitics? Is it just a tool for the military industrial complex to create stages of more conflicts? Or what?
-
EV, maybe you want to take a step back and realize that when people talk about the Six Day War, they talk about the six days of military action from June 5 to June 10, 1967. That's what it's named after, that's what it refers to. In your reading up on the topic you might have broadened your view on the conflict to before and after the military events, but don't call that the 6 Day War.
I fail to see how we are supposed to have a meaningful discussion about the topic when you come in and proclaim that Israel didn't start the 6 Day War, something that plain disputes historical fact, only for you to "reveal" later that you personally redefined the term for yourself.
rumborak
-
Can somebody explain to me why the U.S. supports Israel so much? I know the two are allies, but why the commitment no matter what? The public that support Israel seem to be either evangelical Christians or Islamophobes. But religiosity can't explain it all. Does the U.S. feel bad that it didn't accept enough Jewish immigrants during WWII? Seems like that guilt should be left to the Europeans though. Is it about politicians getting money from AIPAC? Is it just geopolitics? Is it just a tool for the military industrial complex to create stages of more conflicts? Or what?
Because they share the same values for freedom and have a shared common bond of democracy. Post world war II America realized how vital the relationship was with Israel and they do share much as far as technology secrets, also Israel sereves as the platform the US Military historically uses to test its newest airforce aircrafts etc.
-
Because they share the same values for freedom and have a shared common bond of democracy. Post world war II America realized how vital the relationship was
Eh, Zionism has little to do with American values. And didn't the U.S. pretty much have no relationship with Israel for its first couple of decades? I suppose such a relationship could have been useful in the Cold War, and might as well be friends with nuke holders.
-
Because they share the same values for freedom and have a shared common bond of democracy. Post world war II America realized how vital the relationship was
Eh, Zionism has little to do with American values. And didn't the U.S. pretty much have no relationship with Israel for its first couple of decades? I suppose such a relationship could have been useful in the Cold War, and might as well be friends with nuke holders.
I disagree..
who should the US be supporting? Zionism is nothing more then the Jews reclaiming their riteful Nation. I could say that the USA did the same in many ways..althoough they had no connection to the land before colonizing it.. again I could argue the birth of America and Zionism are similar as far as fleeing oppresion and freedom for all
-
Can somebody explain to me why the U.S. supports Israel so much? I know the two are allies, but why the commitment no matter what? The public that support Israel seem to be either evangelical Christians or Islamophobes. But religiosity can't explain it all.
Why can't it? We've got Jews in influential political organizations and even then plenty in private organizations that lobby to the politicians. And Jews are tight-knit enough culturally here in the US that if someone came out against Israel, it could be political suicide.
And there are the evangelical Christians that feel a mandate to support the country. They too, are part of politics much in the same way as the Jews.
-
EV, maybe you want to take a step back and realize that when people talk about the Six Day War, they talk about the six days of military action from June 5 to June 10, 1967. That's what it's named after, that's what it refers to. In your reading up on the topic you might have broadened your view on the conflict to before and after the military events, but don't call that the 6 Day War.
I fail to see how we are supposed to have a meaningful discussion about the topic when you come in and proclaim that Israel didn't start the 6 Day War, something that plain disputes historical fact, only for you to "reveal" later that you personally redefined the term for yourself.
rumborak
This.
-
EV, maybe you want to take a step back and realize that when people talk about the Six Day War, they talk about the six days of military action from June 5 to June 10, 1967. That's what it's named after, that's what it refers to. In your reading up on the topic you might have broadened your view on the conflict to before and after the military events, but don't call that the 6 Day War.
I fail to see how we are supposed to have a meaningful discussion about the topic when you come in and proclaim that Israel didn't start the 6 Day War, something that plain disputes historical fact, only for you to "reveal" later that you personally redefined the term for yourself.
rumborak
This.
That.,... is again incorrect. unless you can point to anything factual.. your posts really dont change history, you may want to again reread history
-
k. Great contribution.
rumborak
-
EV, maybe you want to take a step back and realize that when people talk about the Six Day War, they talk about the six days of military action from June 5 to June 10, 1967. That's what it's named after, that's what it refers to. In your reading up on the topic you might have broadened your view on the conflict to before and after the military events, but don't call that the 6 Day War.
I fail to see how we are supposed to have a meaningful discussion about the topic when you come in and proclaim that Israel didn't start the 6 Day War, something that plain disputes historical fact, only for you to "reveal" later that you personally redefined the term for yourself.
rumborak
This.
That.,... is again incorrect. unless you can point to anything factual.. your posts really dont change history, you may want to again reread history
Dude, IT WAS IN THE ARTICLE YOU YOURSELF POSTED. What more do you want from me? The war lasted 6 FREAKING DAYS. What you posted WAS A MONTH PRIOR TO THE ACTUAL WAR. Israel pre-emptively struck Egypt. Choose to believe it or not, but, as YOU keep saying, this is FACT
-
EV, maybe you want to take a step back and realize that when people talk about the Six Day War, they talk about the six days of military action from June 5 to June 10, 1967. That's what it's named after, that's what it refers to. In your reading up on the topic you might have broadened your view on the conflict to before and after the military events, but don't call that the 6 Day War.
I fail to see how we are supposed to have a meaningful discussion about the topic when you come in and proclaim that Israel didn't start the 6 Day War, something that plain disputes historical fact, only for you to "reveal" later that you personally redefined the term for yourself.
rumborak
This.
That.,... is again incorrect. unless you can point to anything factual.. your posts really dont change history, you may want to again reread history
Dude, IT WAS IN THE ARTICLE YOU YOURSELF POSTED. What more do you want from me? The war lasted 6 FREAKING DAYS. What you posted WAS A MONTH PRIOR TO THE ACTUAL WAR. Israel pre-emptively struck Egypt. Choose to believe it or not, but, as YOU keep saying, this is FACT
again.. that is the name of the time it took to get the enemy to surrender ( 6 Days), not when the enemies of Israel declared war or when the conflict had started. as the article plainly states..and many articles plainly state and history shows
In May 1967 before the Six-Day War of 1967, Hafez Assad, then Syria's Defense Minister declared: "Our forces are now entirely ready not only to repulse the aggression, but to initiate the act of liberation itself, and to explode the Zionist presence in the Arab homeland. The Syrian Army, with its finger on the trigger, is united... I, as a military man, believe that the time has come to enter into a battle of annihilation." ( thats called a declaration of War)
again I showed what everyone knows about the MiGs being shot down.. and Israel stating that it was a provocation of War, the Enemy of Israel declared war and started to amass their armies for the War..
-
Lets move to another subject..anyone see Nasrallahs comments today?
-
The local newspaper's editorial made an interesting observation. They ran position statements from various administrations over the years and it seems that Obama's position is exactly the same one the US has had since, well, 1967. Nothing's changed except that he actually used the term "'67 borders" rather than citing the UN resolution number.
It's absolutely amazing how important it is for people to find things to attack the opposing party over, even if it's something they're supposed to agree with. It would appear that no one is supposed to have their own opinion in US politics anymore. Only positions contrary to their opponents.
-
The local newspaper's editorial made an interesting observation. They ran position statements from various administrations over the years and it seems that Obama's position is exactly the same one the US has had since, well, 1967. Nothing's changed except that he actually used the term "'67 borders" rather than citing the UN resolution number.
It's absolutely amazing how important it is for people to find things to attack the opposing party over, even if it's something they're supposed to agree with. It would appear that no one is supposed to have their own opinion in US politics anymore. Only positions contrary to their opponents.
I think most who care about Israel are mad at Obama for many things, I think the worst was the disdain Obama had on his face when Bibi was speaking.. and lets not forget how shabbily Bibi was treated a year ago at the Whitehouse, so for many, Obama reversing GWBs and all other Presidenst postion on Israel not having to go back to the 67 lines was more of an aggresive move by Obama to rub salt in the already open wound. The timing was aweful by Obama, but we saw his toast in England so we know Obama is out to lunch..timing and protocol is not an Obama strong suit
I think Obama is trying to get Bibi out and a dove in , like Obama. to Obama Bibi is GWB and he hates him. and trust Bibi cant stand Obama, who could blame him
-
Obama reversing GWBs and all other Presidenst postion on Israel not having to go back to the 67 lines was more of an aggresive move by Obama to rub salt in the already open wound.
“These permanent status negotiations, and the negotiations between Israel and the Arab states, will take place on the basis of Resolutions 242 and 338.”
— Invitation by U.S. Secretary of State James Baker for Arab-Israeli peace talks, in October 1991
“As part of a final peace settlement, Israel must have secure and recognized borders. These should emerge from negotiations between the parties in accordance with United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338.”
— Prepared statement by President George W. Bush in April 2005
There is no reversing.
-
While that is true, I don't think it was ever reflected by actual US-Israeli politics. Continuing settlemens were usually met with "the US does not condone this", and that was it.
I think the outrage is partially because people realize that Obama means this seriously.
rumborak
-
I'm still wondering whether Netanyahu really meant a Palestinian state allowing unlimited Jewish immigration. That's just so out there, it can't be right.
EDIT: CNN says he was talking about Palestinians returning to Palestine if they want to. That makes more sense.
rumborak
-
Obama reversing GWBs and all other Presidenst postion on Israel not having to go back to the 67 lines was more of an aggresive move by Obama to rub salt in the already open wound.
“These permanent status negotiations, and the negotiations between Israel and the Arab states, will take place on the basis of Resolutions 242 and 338.”
— Invitation by U.S. Secretary of State James Baker for Arab-Israeli peace talks, in October 1991
“As part of a final peace settlement, Israel must have secure and recognized borders. These should emerge from negotiations between the parties in accordance with United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338.”
— Prepared statement by President George W. Bush in April 2005
There is no reversing.
There is.. and no American President had ever been so hostile to an Israeli PM..and that was TWICE Obama acted like a louse to Bibi.
even Obama had to back track.. polls show America supports Bibi more then Obama... who wouldnt?
-
"Bibi"? There couldn't be a possible bias, could there?
rumborak
-
I think most who care about Israel are mad at Obama for many things, I think the worst was the disdain Obama had on his face when Bibi was speaking..
I think the relationship of the two administrations turned to poop when the Israeli government okayed the construction of hundreds of settlements just as Biden arrived a while back.
-
The active continuation of the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza strip under the pretense of arms blocking probably didn't help either with the relations.
rumborak
-
I think most who care about Israel are mad at Obama for many things, I think the worst was the disdain Obama had on his face when Bibi was speaking..
I think the relationship of the two administrations turned to poop when the Israeli government okayed the construction of hundreds of settlements just as Biden arrived a while back.
Thats a debatable point, its possible.. but the issue is why would Obama care about the natural growth of complexes.. the use of the term "settlement" is even debatable when one looks at what this is and its well within an already known area...
certainly Id point ot the Hamas charter and the indoctrination of hatred preached against the Jews as the real issue that needs to be solved..and unless that changes ( slim to no chance sadly) I dont see these minor issues ( settlements) as a valid reason for Obama to be so hostile .. but Obama is a far left radical, with radical associations, and Obama has a tilt against Israel with any looking into his past assocations..
-
Eh, Zionism has little to do with American values.
Actually, its possible that the proto-U.S.A. spirit of escaping persecution sympathizes with the Zionist movement. But I don't know of any American support for Zionism in its early stages. It was the British who were supporting early Zionism, and they also seemed to have believed at that point that they themselves (British) were Israelite descendants.
-
Eh, Zionism has little to do with American values.
Actually, its possible that the proto-U.S.A. spirit of escaping persecution sympathizes with the Zionist movement. But I don't know of any American support for Zionism in its early stages. It was the British who were supporting early Zionism, and they also seemed to have believed at that point that they themselves (British) were Israelite descendants.
Thats a good observation..
-
Obama reversing GWBs and all other Presidenst postion on Israel not having to go back to the 67 lines was more of an aggresive move by Obama to rub salt in the already open wound.
“These permanent status negotiations, and the negotiations between Israel and the Arab states, will take place on the basis of Resolutions 242 and 338.”
— Invitation by U.S. Secretary of State James Baker for Arab-Israeli peace talks, in October 1991
“As part of a final peace settlement, Israel must have secure and recognized borders. These should emerge from negotiations between the parties in accordance with United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338.”
— Prepared statement by President George W. Bush in April 2005
There is no reversing.
I wouldn't say it's a reverse per se; the change Obama made to the usual U.S. policy is that previous Presidents saw the restoration of 1967 borders as the desired result of negotiations, whereas Obama has made it essentially into a prerequisite for further negotiations. That's all good and well, but it does give Hamas precedent to ask for even more if these negotiations do go through.
-
Obama reversing GWBs and all other Presidenst postion on Israel not having to go back to the 67 lines was more of an aggresive move by Obama to rub salt in the already open wound.
“These permanent status negotiations, and the negotiations between Israel and the Arab states, will take place on the basis of Resolutions 242 and 338.”
— Invitation by U.S. Secretary of State James Baker for Arab-Israeli peace talks, in October 1991
“As part of a final peace settlement, Israel must have secure and recognized borders. These should emerge from negotiations between the parties in accordance with United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338.”
— Prepared statement by President George W. Bush in April 2005
There is no reversing.
I wouldn't say it's a reverse per se; the change Obama made to the usual U.S. policy is that previous Presidents saw the restoration of 1967 borders as the desired result of negotiations, whereas Obama has made it essentially into a prerequisite for further negotiations. That's all good and well, but it does give Hamas precedent to ask for even more if these negotiations do go through.
From what I gather, that's not what he said or meant. As I understand it, he suggested that the '67 borders should be used as a basis for further negotiations. Big difference. And it is no different than US policy has been for decades.
Interestingly, it doesn't appear to have been a problem for Benji either:
https://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/05/a-joint-statement-from-clinton-and-netanyahu.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+andrewsullivan%2FrApM+%28The+Daily+Dish%29
The Prime Minister and the Secretary agreed on the importance of continuing direct negotiations to achieve our goals. The Secretary reiterated that "the United States believes that through good-faith negotiations, the parties can mutually agree on an outcome which ends the conflict and reconciles the Palestinian goal of an independent and viable state, based on the 1967 lines, with agreed swaps, and the Israeli goal of a Jewish state with secure and recognized borders that reflect subsequent developments and meet Israeli security requirements."
-
The active continuation of the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza strip under the pretense of arms blocking probably didn't help either with the relations.
rumborak
amazing..
1. there is no humanitarian crisis caused by Israel, millions of pounds of critical goods are sent in each day, most taken by Hamas
2. Galid Shalit could be smuggled out of Gaza
3. Iran is trying to smuggle weapons in ( karin A , for an example)
4. Egypt has opened the Rafah crossing permenently , in violation of all prior agreements.
your jive is strictly jive...sounds pretty biased
-
"Bibi"? There couldn't be a possible bias, could there?
rumborak
The only bias is your hypersensitvity to the truth..
-
1. I concede that EV is correct about the humanitarian aid bit.
2. Bibi is what Israelis call him.
-
1. I concede that EV is correct about the humanitarian aid bit.
2. Bibi is what Israelis call him.
and Im correct on the Karin A, and how until Gahlid Shalit is returned , Israel has vaild concerns about him being smuggled out of Gaza.
-
This is actually a fascinating situation. This is essentially a foreign leader playing the game of American politics better than Americans. Benji deliberately misstated what Obama said to throw him under the bus.
What Bibi gains by misrepresenting Obama's Middle East policy (https://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20110526/wl_time/08599207401500;_ylt=AplSIB4UsQD7mTh7IWoHfFpY24cA;_ylu=X3oDMTMyZWpnY2tsBGFzc2V0A3RpbWUvMjAxMTA1MjYvMDg1OTkyMDc0MDE1MDAEY2NvZGUDb2ZmZ2I1MGsEY3BvcwM3BHBvcwM3BHNlYwN5bl90b3Bfc3RvcmllcwRzbGsDd2hhdGJpYmlnYWlu)
But Netanyahu did an astonishing thing: he chose to ignore the part about the land swaps. He also chose to ignore some significant, and rather hard-line, statements of principle that Obama made in his May 19 speech on Middle East policy, reiterating that Israel shouldnt have to negotiate with terrorist groups like Hamas that deny its right to exist; that Israels security requires a long-term military presence in the Jordan River Valley, eventually leading to a full withdrawal (but setting no timetable for that withdrawal); that any Palestinian state must be demilitarized; and that he would actively oppose any unilateral U.N. effort to declare Palestinian statehood. Instead, in a most condescending manner, Netanyahu chose to lecture the President on a position that he knew Obama hadnt taken - a return to the indefensible pre-1967 borders. (Obama Warns Netanyahu: It's not the U.S. You Have to Convince, It's the Palestinians.)
Why on earth would Bibi Netanyahu choose to be so boorish and provocative? Because he can be. He has the U.S. Congress in his pocket, a fact made obvious by the applause tsunami that attended his speech to a joint session (and by the fact that an astonishing 68 Senators and 286 Representatives attended the American Israel Public Affairs Committee banquet the night before he spoke). He also has a stronger argument this time around. The apparent reconciliation of the Palestinian factions allows Netanyahu to focus on Israels greatest fear: when push comes to shove, the Palestinians have never really acknowledged Israels right to exist. The one exception to that rule - Yasser Arafats signing of the Oslo accords - seems hollow, given the subsequent Palestinian rejection of both the Clinton and Olmert offers. But Netanyahus offensive also had an important tactical effect: Israels continued, illegal construction of settlements on Palestinian lands - an impediment to peace every bit as great as the Palestinian refusal to truly acknowledge Israels existence - took a distinct backseat during the week of dueling speeches. Netanyahu was playing offense so he didnt have to play defense.
Netanyahu knows American politics. The ease and eloquence of his address to Congress were stunning evidence of that. And so he must have been aware of the political impact of his cheesy gambit: he has now, overtly, tossed his support to the Republicans in 2012. Mitt Romney was able to say that Obama had thrown Israel under the bus. Given his congressional support, Netanyahu may be able to get away with playing so bold a hand - but it is inappropriate behavior for an American ally, and you can bet that Obama wont forget it
-
EB,
There is a Yang to that Yin ( Thank You Slycoordinator).
Obama also was playing politcs sandbagging Bibi.. so it cut both ways. Obama was playing to his far left base.
for Bibi, right now he doesnt have the votes in the knessett to do much anyway, he cant concede land if he wanted to.
I personally dont thing Bibi came to DC to have this even be a subject, Carney said Obama was not going to talk about the 67 borders 24 hours before Obama sandbagged Bibi, so I dont think Bibi did anything but react defesively to Obamas hostility. Bibi didnt have time to really think it out and go with a plan., maybe it worked for him anyway..
-
It's not sandbagging when all you do is suggest the same thing that he already agreed to.
-
It's not sandbagging when all you do is suggest the same thing that he already agreed to.
I think Superdude, already succinclty pointed out the differences to what Obama said, and how it was a change in long standing US Policy and signed agreements by congress.
again.. Carney stated that Obama would NOT be adressing this..and Obama for some reason decided to go after Bibi the day before he was to arrive.
-
And I quite succinctly pointed out to Superdude why he was wrong.
-
I would think that those earlier presidents wouldn't cling to the 1967 borders as much if they'd found that Hamas was an active part of the negotiations.
There is a Yang to that Ying..
Probably everyone else here wouldn't care, but since I've been studying the past 4 years to be an acupuncturist I need to point out that it's "yin" and not "ying."
-
And I quite succinctly pointed out to Superdude why he was wrong.
but hes not wrong.. this was discussed last night to the nines on TV.. 242 states that Israel does not have to do anythign until they have a vaible partner in peace that has thrown out the charter for their destruction. Obama put it backwards.. on purpose.
that been long standing US postion, congress voted 95 to 0 that thats the US policy.
EB, why are spinning so hard that Obama was not a louse? Bibi was told and everyone was told Obama would not be brining this up, Carney said that 24 hours before Obama sucker punched Bibi.. thats the bigger story
-
EB, why are spinning so hard that Obama was not a louse?
Well, I actually think he is a louse. I've been very clear on that. I just tend to think so for reasons very different than the majority.
One recurring theme through all of my posts here over the years is that our system is a joke. Part of the reason it's a joke is because the parties have become more important than the politicians or the constituents (exactly like unions). As this trend continues, you see more and more people attacking politicians for bullshit reasons which are always related to their party and not their position or character. You my friend are a very good example of that. You will attack Obama for any decision he makes, valid or not, just like you will defend his dimwitted predecessor. You're completely oblivious to the fact that Obama's essentially Bush's third (and fourth) term. This '67 border nonsense is just more of the same partisan bullshit that makes me come on here and rag on what a joke democracy is. If Bush had said the exact same words, Romney would have been on his cock, Benjy would have pronounced him Israel's truest friend, you'd defend him, and countless democratic drones would be rambling on about what an idiot he is for throwing Israel under the bus.
-
EB, why are spinning so hard that Obama was not a louse?
Well, I actually think he is a louse. I've been very clear on that. I just tend to think so for reasons very different than the majority.
One recurring theme through all of my posts here over the years is that our system is a joke. Part of the reason it's a joke is because the parties have become more important than the politicians or the constituents (exactly like unions). As this trend continues, you see more and more people attacking politicians for bullshit reasons which are always related to their party and not their position or character. You my friend are a very good example of that. You will attack Obama for any decision he makes, valid or not, just like you will defend his dimwitted predecessor. You're completely oblivious to the fact that Obama's essentially Bush's third (and fourth) term. This '67 border nonsense is just more of the same partisan bullshit that makes me come on here and rag on what a joke democracy is. If Bush had said the exact same words, Romney would have been on his cock, Benjy would have pronounced him Israel's truest friend, you'd defend him, and countless democratic drones would be rambling on about what an idiot he is for throwing Israel under the bus.
My issue is Obama is so far to the left, his associations make me very uncomfortable. I know your view is "everyone in politcs is the same" I understand that macro pov you have, and I have stated for the most part that view has some merit. thats why I vote party and not politician. but Obama breaks all norms, I will never trust that he loves this country, his associations are horrid, he is Soros's puppet.. GWB was apple pie compared to this Obama.. Im sorry, but I go by my gut on this one, Obama is a wolf in sheeps clothing , what he is doing is proven it cant work anbd he is doubling down on it.. on every single policy..
did you see Steny Hoyer and Reed have backed away from Obamas hostility at Bibi..The Dems are fleeing Obama.. and the top Jewish contributer to Obama is pulling his support to Obama
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/05/obama_dumped_by_big_dem_donor.html
-
Your sense of the political spectrum is pretty skewed if you think Obama is far left. Or even left.
-
Your sense of the political spectrum is pretty skewed if you think Obama is far left. Or even left.
is this a joke? thats an honest question
-
Hi there. :)
Before this conversation gets too derailed about Obama, could you guys possibly move it to the Obama thread? I would greatly appreciate it. :)
-
Hi there. :)
Before this conversation gets too derailed about Obama, could you guys possibly move it to the Obama thread? I would greatly appreciate it. :)
My bad. I meant to C/P his question to that thread before I replied for this very reason. (although it actually is fairly Israel realted :))
-
This thread is getting veeeeery interesting.
-
Hi there. :)
Before this conversation gets too derailed about Obama, could you guys possibly move it to the Obama thread? I would greatly appreciate it. :)
sure..no problem Adami. I know we all go off topic a bit when "its Obama and Israel" they get a bit merged
Wow.. only 12% think Obama is pro Israel in Israel...I cant believe its not 0%
https://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=222451
-
What a stupid poll. What does "pro-Israel" even mean? He is both pro-Palestine and pro-Israel. Yay for things that are not black and white.
rumborak
-
Keep in mind JPost is to the Jews as Fox is to Americans.
-
Keep in mind JPost is to the Jews as Fox is to Americans.
does Haaretz have a poll discrediting this poll?,,, the answer is NO..
-
Maybe not that poll in particular, but they do have some interesting data on the general opinion on the occupied territories.
-
Maybe not that poll in particular, but they do have some interesting data on the general opinion on the occupied territories.
I read it.
-
So you know that data shows a large number of Israelis want peace and are willing to concede land for it?
-
So you know that data shows a large number of Israelis want peace and are willing to concede land for it?
Doesn't matter.
-
I know, I was just trying to think of a polite rebuttal.
-
I know, I was just trying to think of a polite rebuttal.
Well that too, but I meant it doesn't matter what a large number of Israelis think.
-
Oh no, I simply meant that if JPost gives X numbers of Israelis trusting Obama, it ought to be taken with a grain of salt, since the numbers they'd likely give for Israelis opposing the current terms of a two-state solution will probably also be skewed in classic Faux News style.
-
Oh no, I simply meant that if JPost gives X numbers of Israelis trusting Obama, it ought to be taken with a grain of salt, since the numbers they'd likely give for Israelis opposing the current terms of a two-state solution will probably also be skewed in classic Faux News style.
any reference to "Faux " News shows me that you dont understand any sort of objective news. Fox is a vaild news soource, better then their competitors for sure..
the poll is actually a bit old.. but it sows that almost 9 out of 10 people who read Jpost do not trust Obama.. and why should they???? I wouldnt. Obama is hostile to Israel, he is proudly hostile to Israel, and who cares if many Israelis would concede land for peace. the issue is the Palis WONT, and if they do its stricly part of a stepped plan of taking Israel over, they will not accept a Jewish Israel, they use symantics they "support Israel as theirs and when they can take it over" its all word play..
-
Oh no, I simply meant that if JPost gives X numbers of Israelis trusting Obama, it ought to be taken with a grain of salt, since the numbers they'd likely give for Israelis opposing the current terms of a two-state solution will probably also be skewed in classic Faux News style.
any reference to "Faux " News shows me that you dont understand any sort of objective news. Fox is a vaild news soource, better then their competitors for sure..
With all due respect EV, you're not someone I'd trust to tell me about objectivity
-
Oh no, I simply meant that if JPost gives X numbers of Israelis trusting Obama, it ought to be taken with a grain of salt, since the numbers they'd likely give for Israelis opposing the current terms of a two-state solution will probably also be skewed in classic Faux News style.
any reference to "Faux " News shows me that you dont understand any sort of objective news. Fox is a vaild news soource, better then their competitors for sure..
With all due respect EV, you're not someone I'd trust to tell me about objectivity
with all due respect.. you really dont know me..and you have no idea how much time I put into forming my views... but you never miss a chance to take a shot at me, do you critique everyone like you do me? I dont see it.. to me thats not objective
-
Fox News coverage is fine.
The problem is, 70 percent of what you seen on Fox News is actually not news, but commentary. And Epic View's right, that all the competitor "news" networks are the same.
But no-way CNN's commentators are worse than Fox's. MSNBC is about equal to Fox in terms of blatant thinking for you. CNN, not so much. If only they weren't trying to hard to be cool.
-
Fox News coverage is fine.
The problem is, 70 percent of what you seen on Fox News is actually not news, but commentary. And Epic View's right, that all the competitor "news" networks are the same.
But no-way CNN's commentators are worse than Fox's. MSNBC is about equal to Fox in terms of blatant thinking for you. CNN, not so much. If only they weren't trying to hard to be cool.
well said PC!!! Fox has been scritnized and its been shown to be the most fair as far as time given to all points of view..its just that liberals cant handle anything thats not spoon fed agenda that they want..
It cracks me up when someones arguement is "Fox is Faux" thats all I need to know that they have no arguement and are just agenda driven...lol
The issue is that the AP play themselves as obkjective and they are not.. and look into how many news netwrokrs are puppets of Soros? PLM ..any idea how many?
-
Epic, Fox may not be as bad as people who like liberal networks pretend, but two wrongs doesn't make a right. Sure, Fox is no worse than MSNBC. But both networks are complete shams as news networks and if the health of our government is dependent partly on having a strong news media (as any democracy should) than a quick look at the big names, Fox included, should explain why we're stuck with what we're stuck with now.
-
HI PC..
take a look..
https://newsbusters.org/blogs/dan-gainor/2011/05/13/gainor-column-over-30-major-news-organizations-linked-george-soros
-
In an effort to keep the Israel thread somewhat on topic, I'm replying to the FOX nonsense in the chat thread.
https://www.dreamtheaterforums.org/boards/index.php?topic=327.msg901291#msg901291
-
the issue is the Palis WONT, and if they do its stricly part of a stepped plan of taking Israel over, they will not accept a Jewish Israel, they use symantics they "support Israel as theirs and when they can take it over" its all word play..
Could you elaborate on this? Palis is Palestinians?
-
the issue is the Palis WONT, and if they do its stricly part of a stepped plan of taking Israel over, they will not accept a Jewish Israel, they use symantics they "support Israel as theirs and when they can take it over" its all word play..
Could you elaborate on this? What's Palis?
I assume he means the Palestinians. It's hard to tell because he's not correct about his statement if he is.
-
The only foreseeable obstacle are those Palestinians who vote for and support Hamas. Will they continue to support extreme measures once concessions are made?
-
HI PC..
take a look..
https://newsbusters.org/blogs/dan-gainor/2011/05/13/gainor-column-over-30-major-news-organizations-linked-george-soros
Will you stop mentioning Soros in every damn topic?
-
The only foreseeable obstacle are those Palestinians who vote for and support Hamas. Will they continue to support extreme measures once concessions are made?
Yes.. they will still support extreme measures. its been ingrained in them since birth to hate infidels, they are indoctrinated into it, hate and shadism fill their Tvs, their news, their madrases.
I used to think that it would be healed in my lifetime, I now feel it will never be fixed.
-
HI PC..
take a look..
https://newsbusters.org/blogs/dan-gainor/2011/05/13/gainor-column-over-30-major-news-organizations-linked-george-soros
Will you stop mentioning Soros in every damn topic?
do you know he is yet? He is Moveon.org.. and we see he has a controling had in 30 media outlets.. But FOX is the issue..right?
-
How is Soros different than Rupert Murdoch?
-
How is Soros different than Rupert Murdoch?
?????
how are they same?
-
The only foreseeable obstacle are those Palestinians who vote for and support Hamas. Will they continue to support extreme measures once concessions are made?
Yes.. they will still support extreme measures. its been ingrained in them since birth to hate infidels, they are indoctrinated into it, hate and shadism fill their Tvs, their news, their madrases.
I used to think that it would be healed in my lifetime, I now feel it will never be fixed.
I was kinda hoping to get the necessary info from Adami or Ido, y'know, someone who has actually lived there and actually knows something about the people involved.
-
The only foreseeable obstacle are those Palestinians who vote for and support Hamas. Will they continue to support extreme measures once concessions are made?
Yes.. they will still support extreme measures. its been ingrained in them since birth to hate infidels, they are indoctrinated into it, hate and shadism fill their Tvs, their news, their madrases.
I used to think that it would be healed in my lifetime, I now feel it will never be fixed.
I was kinda hoping to get the necessary info from Adami or Ido, y'know, someone who has actually lived there and actually knows something about the people involved.
well...Im sure they will respond, next time address the question to them , so there is no confusion who can answer it
https://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=223181
But here are the Fatah.."moderates".. yea right.. moderates
-
@Israelis and Israel experts:
The only foreseeable obstacle are those Palestinians who vote for and support Hamas. Will they continue to support extreme measures once concessions are made?
-
@Israelis and Israel experts:
The only foreseeable obstacle are those Palestinians who vote for and support Hamas. Will they continue to support extreme measures once concessions are made?
or Fatah...us "experts" know they are the same ... some here would argue Dems and Repubs are the same...trust the Fatah Hamas thing is "the same"
Im an expert..so make sure you see this
https://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=223181
-
@Israelis and Israel experts:
The only foreseeable obstacle are those Palestinians who vote for and support Hamas. Will they continue to support extreme measures once concessions are made?
lol sorry, it's a little difficult at times if you know what I mean.
The Palestinians will vote for strength, as long as Hamas continues to be the stronger of the groups, they will be voted for. Fatah has proved themselves to be...well.....weak amongst other things. As much as I love Abbas, he has very little power. They credit the Hamas for reclaiming Gaza, and see Fatah as simply a tool of the Israeli government. It's their isolation that Israel helps impose that helps reenforce these ideas and viewpoints.
If I missed anything, let me know.
-
@Israelis and Israel experts:
The only foreseeable obstacle are those Palestinians who vote for and support Hamas. Will they continue to support extreme measures once concessions are made?
lol sorry, it's a little difficult at times if you know what I mean.
The Palestinians will vote for strength, as long as Hamas continues to be the stronger of the groups, they will be voted for. Fatah has proved themselves to be...well.....weak amongst other things. As much as I love Abbas, he has very little power. They credit the Hamas for reclaiming Gaza, and see Fatah as simply a tool of the Israeli government. It's their isolation that Israel helps impose that helps reenforce these ideas and viewpoints.
If I missed anything, let me know.
Very accurate..well said Adami
-
Then why didn't you just say that to begin with? :p
Thanks Adami, pretty much what I was looking for. Y'know discussing Israel with you, I've learned it is a fact that the more you learn about something the less you feel like you know. :lol
-
No problem.
Since this is the Israel thread, I guess I could say in here that lately I've contemplated joining the Israeli army. I have no desire to fight any Palestinians, but not having served really feels like a badge of shame. My only issue (aside from the fact that I am not in the least bit athletic and I'm horribly out of shape) is that I've forgotten 95% of my Hebrew. I figure maybe I'll take lessons and relearn it, and then go there and do my time........maybe serve as a counselor to the army since I'll have my Masters by then. Hm.
-
(https://www.blacksnowcomic.com/blog1/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/bill-murray-stripes.jpg)
-
(https://www.blacksnowcomic.com/blog1/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/bill-murray-stripes.jpg)
That's pretty much how the army is.
..........right?
-
Well, my first thought (which I decided not to post) was that a guy could probably get some pretty sweet tail in the Israeli army, so yeah, Stripes probably wasn't too far off the mark.
-
Well, my first thought (which I decided not to post) was that a guy could probably get some pretty sweet tail in the Israeli army, so yeah, Stripes probably wasn't too far off the mark.
From who? The other soldiers? They'd kill me, I'm a big softy. Plus, with any luck I'd be an army counselor or something since I'd have my masters by the time I'd join.
-
If you enlist as an American you might get a job with logistics or communications or something, I dunno if that's something you'd be interested in though.
-
If you enlist as an American you might get a job with logistics or communications or something, I dunno if that's something you'd be interested in though.
I'd enlist as an Israeli, but I'm not sure they'll have much use for a 28 or however old I'll be masters graduate with a bad back and no athletic ability.
-
Thank You Sarah Palin and God Bless her..
https://www.jpost.com/JewishWorld/JewishNews/Article.aspx?id=223386
see ya around everybody..take it easy
-
Thank You Sarah Palin and God Bless her..
https://www.jpost.com/JewishWorld/JewishNews/Article.aspx?id=223386
see ya around everybody..take it easy
I will politely ask this. No one here aside from you has any interest in Jpost, it is not helpful to come in here and just post random Jpost stuff, please contribute to actual conversation going on, or don't. But as it is you're just derailing it with stuff no one other than you has any interest in discussing. Thank you. :)
-
Thank You Sarah Palin and God Bless her..
https://www.jpost.com/JewishWorld/JewishNews/Article.aspx?id=223386
see ya around everybody..take it easy
I will politely ask this. No one here aside from you has any interest in Jpost, it is not helpful to come in here and just post random Jpost stuff, please contribute to actual conversation going on, or don't. But as it is you're just derailing it with stuff no one other than you has any interest in discussing. Thank you. :)
:\...whatever.I politley ask that you just ignore me... really.. but the complaining?..its an interesting article.. sorry I couldnt draw a picture..
its about Jerusalem day!!! ( thats Isreal right?)..??? why would the Jpost not be welcomed? do you speak for trhe entire board? do you think everyone enjoys your posts? some do...some dont.. I never complain
maybe someone else will enjoy the article
-
Considering how much you've posted here, I think it isn't all that feasible for him to completely ignore you. Just my $0.02
-
Fair enough, I'll just stop posting in the thread. Good luck superdude.
-
Considering how much you've posted here, I think it isn't all that feasible for him to completely ignore you. Just my $0.02
I post about the same as everyone else who is active here.. my point being that I read lots of BS that is off topic or of no interest to me, but I dont whine, I just move forward. and many dont post becasue they see how poorly people like me are treated..sad but true..
enjoy... I welcome all comments on the subject, im sorta unconditional.. I wish other were also..sigh
-
Fair enough, I'll just stop posting in the thread. Good luck superdude.
Aw shit...can we still be friends?
-
Considering how much you've posted here, I think it isn't all that feasible for him to completely ignore you. Just my $0.02
I post about the same as everyone else who is active here.. my point being that I read lots of BS that is off topic or of no interest to me, but I dont whine, I just move forward. and many dont post becasue they see how poorly people like me are treated..sad but true..
enjoy... I welcome all comments on the subject, im sorta unconditional.. I wish other were also..sigh
Sorry...I didnt even get you a card
edit: but it isnt my fault....I wasnt invited
-
Khalidi is a personal friend of Obamas.
thoughts?
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/144733
-
Reading that article felt like listening to a 10-year old who got pulled out of a fight. "I didn't do anything at all! He suddenly started hitting me, ma'am! And the others are all liars when they say I hit first!"
Regarding the topic, Obama being a friend of a Columbia professor is a lot better than Bush's affiliation with "think tanks".
rumborak
-
I know I said I wouldn't post here, but I this almost brought a tear to me eye.
https://beta.news.yahoo.com/thousands-rally-tel-aviv-against-occupation-195242666.html
Oddly enough, I was getting ready for my shower and happened to be singing HaTikvah when I saw the news article. I truly hope this is the beginning of something amazing. I would have loved to be have been a part of this.
-
I know I said I wouldn't post here, but I this almost brought a tear to me eye.
https://beta.news.yahoo.com/thousands-rally-tel-aviv-against-occupation-195242666.html
Oddly enough, I was getting ready for my shower and happened to be singing HaTikvah when I saw the news article. I truly hope this is the beginning of something amazing. I would have loved to be have been a part of this.
Would it be a bit ironic to say now that the Messiah is coming? :p
-
I know I said I wouldn't post here, but I this almost brought a tear to me eye.
https://beta.news.yahoo.com/thousands-rally-tel-aviv-against-occupation-195242666.html
Oddly enough, I was getting ready for my shower and happened to be singing HaTikvah when I saw the news article. I truly hope this is the beginning of something amazing. I would have loved to be have been a part of this.
Do you normally sing hatikva in the shower? :lol
-
I was singing it before I got in the shower.
-
Khalidi is a personal friend of Obamas.
thoughts?
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/144733
No thoughts. That is a complete non-issue. They are interested in freedom from what they (and most of the rest of the world) see as opression. This guy supports that cause. There is nothing wrong here at all.
-
Khalidi is a personal friend of Obamas.
thoughts?
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/144733
No thoughts. That is a complete non-issue. They are interested in freedom from what they (and most of the rest of the world) see as opression. This guy supports that cause. There is nothing wrong here at all.
so its ok for him to name a boat after Obama that is not for peace, but to have a conflcit with the Isreali Navy.
-
But it wasn't named after Obama. If you don't understand the difference between a title of a book and the author of it, I can't really help you.
And all Obama can really do is give them a stern warning to stop using the name, which will do jack shit.
-
But it wasn't named after Obama. If you don't understand the difference between a title of a book and the author of it, I can't really help you.
And all Obama can really do is give them a stern warning to stop using the name, which will do jack shit.
its Obamas buddy . PLO operative Rashid Khalidi.. I'm sure he spoke with Obama to get his approval.
-
Or maybe he just liked the book? Nah. You're right. That's clearly impossible...
-
Or maybe he just liked the book? Nah. You're right. That's clearly impossible...
considering all variables.. its clearly unlikely this is not a clear provocation, as the ship will carry American Colors..and Khalidis relationship with Obama..
to me its simple deduction.. not much to really argue or debate.
what Khalidi wants is a picture op of the Israeli Navy having a squirmish with a ship with American colors on it.. I dont see any other reason objectvely
-
A guy raised money to make a boat registered in the US and then named it after Obama's book.
Whether the guys were friends or not, the boat is named after the book. That is not open for debate; it is fact.
Sure, they're trying to make the boat seem scarier by having it carry American flags, but this isn't proof that Obama helping them in any way or condoning this.
-
A guy raised money to make a boat registered in the US and then named it after Obama's book.
Whether the guys were friends or not, the boat is named after the book. That is not open for debate; it is fact.
Sure, they're trying to make the boat seem scarier by having it carry American flags, but this isn't proof that Obama helping them in any way or condoning this.
no..not scarier.. they want a photo that will look like an Israeli Navy boat is attacking an American vessel. that will be used as propganda.. and we know from the last go round they dont "come in peace"..
and lets not forget its illegal what they are trying to do..
-
I agree that they're trying to provoke a confrontation to elicit sympathy from the West.
That's why they're carrying American flags. And that's probably why they named the boat that way too.
So how is that Obama's fault? If they had named the ship God-Fearing Republicans would you be blaming Palin for inciting violence?
-
I agree that they're trying to provoke a confrontation to elicit sympathy from the West.
That's why they're carrying American flags. And that's probably why they named the boat that way too.
So how is that Obama's fault? If they had named the ship God-Fearing Republicans would you be blaming Palin for inciting violence?
Well of course not, the Republicans are faultless, bless 'em.
-
BECAUSE IT IS OBAMA AND HE IS EVIL
-
*sigh*
Just had a wonderful conversation with my brother about Israel's immigration policy (which is coming down on children of immigrants or something, my memory of it is fuzzy now). He's one of those "a Jewish state for Jews" guys, and his belief is that a non-Jew should be required to undergo mandatory military service and by way of that earn his/her citizenship, not that citizenship should be granted before or in some other way. Sounds a little unfair to me, and his justification of course is that Israel has to remain a Jewish state and a Jewish majority. If it doesn't, he thinks Jews will be kicked out of politics and there would be nothing to stop immigration policies expelling all Jews from the state.
Sorry, just had to vent. As I've said before, I'm the bloody leftist black sheep in the family. Funny, huh?
-
If I understand correctly, only Jewish citizens of Israel have to serve in the army. Seems kind of weird. What happens to people who are half Jewish and half Arab?
-
If I understand correctly, only Jewish citizens of Israel have to serve in the army. Seems kind of weird. What happens to people who are half Jewish and half Arab?
There's a difference between mandatory and being allowed to serve. And Arab isn't a religion.
For instance the Druze aren't mandated to serve, but they're allowed to if they want to. And you don't have to be jewish, you can be any religion.
-
If I understand correctly, only Jewish citizens of Israel have to serve in the army. Seems kind of weird. What happens to people who are half Jewish and half Arab?
There's a difference between mandatory and being allowed to serve. And Arab isn't a religion.
For instance the Druze aren't mandated to serve, but they're allowed to if they want to. And you don't have to be jewish, you can be any religion.
I didn't say Arab was a religion, and I meant Jewish as an ethnicity not a religion. So are you saying that people who religiously belong to Judaism are obliged to serve in the military?
-
If I understand correctly, only Jewish citizens of Israel have to serve in the army. Seems kind of weird. What happens to people who are half Jewish and half Arab?
There's a difference between mandatory and being allowed to serve. And Arab isn't a religion.
For instance the Druze aren't mandated to serve, but they're allowed to if they want to. And you don't have to be jewish, you can be any religion.
I didn't say Arab was a religion, and I meant Jewish as an ethnicity not a religion. So are you saying that people who religiously belong to Judaism are obliged to serve in the military?
Well half jewish and half arab doesn't make sense then. There are plenty of Jewish Arabs. People who are extremely religious can usually get out of the army just like in American during the drafts. But unless you do something to get out of it, Israeli citizens are required to serve at 18, except for people like the Druze, who it's voluntary for.
-
I'm just confused about the line between those who have to serve and those that don't. Some legal statuses are pretty either/or, like citizenship, age and sex. But how could something as major as this be based on fuzzy classifications like race and religion (or whatever I'm missing)?
-
I'm just confused about the line between those who have to serve and those that don't. Some legal statuses are pretty either/or, like citizenship, age and sex. But how could something as major as this be based on fuzzy classifications like race and religion (or whatever I'm missing)?
It's not fuzzy at all. Let's start with the basic rule, and then go through the exceptions, cool?
Basic rule: Israeli Citizens (Men and Women) must serve in the Israeli army at the age of 18.
Exception 1: If you are studying a yeshiva (unversity) you can opt out of the military.
Exception 2: If you are conciouncess objector, meaning ultra religious, you can opt out of the military.
Exception 3: If you are a druze, or an Arab Israeli, you can serve if you want, but it's not mandatory.
If you have any questions, feel free to ask. But that covers just about all of it, it doesn't matter if you're Jewish, Muslim, Christian, Catholic, Buddhist, Hindu or even scientologist.
-
Exception 3: If you are a druze, or an Arab Israeli, you can serve if you want, but it's not mandatory.
Not according to Wiki though:
Israel, being a Jewish state, has a majority of Jewish soldiers. Druze and Circassian men are subject to mandatory conscription to the IDF just like Israeli Jews.
The impression I'm getting now is that all citizens are legally required to join but that its a controversy among some minorities and so they resist recruitment.
-
You're right, I mistook Druze for the Bedouins. And as far as I know, the Druze aren't resisting recruitment, they just didn't think they were getting treated fairly.
-
So I met this cool Jewish Colombian guy (there's less than 5K here) younger than me. He told me about his cool one year trip to Israel. What I learned was that even if you don't consider yourself Jewish and your mother is/was Jewish it automatically makes you one. Not your father, just your mother. Could anyone corroborate that?
Also, Adami, did you went three years to service in the military?
-
So I met this cool Jewish Colombian guy (there's less than 5K here) younger than me. He told me about his cool one year trip to Israel. What I learned was that even if you don't consider yourself Jewish and your mother is/was Jewish it automatically makes you one. Not your father, just your mother. Could anyone corroborate that?
Also, Adami, did you went three years to service in the military?
Yes, me and SD were trying to explain this a while back :lol
Halachal law states that one is born Jewish if the mother is Jewish.
-
PLM is correct.
And emin, I did not since I live in america and have been in school. But I am highly considering doing it in the next few years after I get my degrees.
-
That's because Halachic (religious) law dictates that Judaism is passed through the mother and not the father. I remember someone explaining to me once that this had to do with the Norse invasion of Europe, and that a lot of Vikings were raping Jewish women in their raids. To avoid the shame of carrying a Norse child, apparently the rabbis then changed Halachic law to pass Judaism through the mother, instead of the Catholic rule of passing Christianity through the father.
-
Thanks for the info. Very informative (Really, Vikings raping Jewish women? That's... harsh!).
And emin, I did not since I live in america and have been in school. But I am highly considering doing it in the next few years after I get my degrees.
So, to get this straight, the three years in the military for men and two for women is in order to let you be a citizen?
-
No, but it is mandatory for every Israeli citizen (except for those exceptions noted by Adami).
-
Global antisemitism is rising, we're mere months away from a Palestinian state that might sue for war crimes and occupation of territory (rightly so, unfortunately), and the Jewish religious right has a stranglehold on Israeli policies and institutions.
Adami, the time has come.
-
Indeed it has. Ready the others, its time to prepare for plan gimmel. This is why we have all the jew gold after all, I just hope the world is ready, and has a taste for lox.
I've said too much.....
-
we need to stop arming Israelies
-
we need to stop arming Israelies
Wut.
-
Indeed it has. Ready the others, its time to prepare for plan gimmel. This is why we have all the jew gold after all, I just hope the world is ready, and has a taste for lox.
I've said too much.....
Wait a minute, you mean it hasn't started yet? Oy vey.
-
we need to stop arming Israelies
Wut.
well if they werent armed theyred be no conflict....
-
You're so dead.
-
we need to stop arming Israelies
Wut.
well if they werent armed theyred be no conflict....
There'd be no isreael. But there would be plenty of conflict amidst the arabs. If they didn't hate the jews so much, they wouldn't have the barely existent calm between them now.
-
Oh Adami, this summer I'm taking courses for major credit and I'm living across the hall from a far rightist studying international relations. He dreams of becoming Israel's ambassador to America. You'd love him.
-
we need to stop arming Israelies
Wut.
well if they werent armed theyred be no conflict....
There'd be no isreael. But there would be plenty of conflict amidst the arabs. If they didn't hate the jews so much, they wouldn't have the barely existent calm between them now.
oh... didnt think that through.... I apologize
-
The conflict among the Arabs wouldn't last so long and would be on a "big war" scale.
Damn it Heaven Outcry Angel, you're gonna pray for Harry soon :lol
-
The conflict among the Arabs wouldn't last so long and would be on a "big war" scale.
Damn it Heaven Outcry Angel, you're gonna pray for Harry soon :lol
I am so confused by this entire post.
Also, I am startled that Pew Agency numbers show the safest place for Jews in Europe is with the French. The French! :dangerwillrobinson:
-
It should have happened before his last post but I didn't see the "there are 2 new posts while you were typing" sign heh
-
The conflict among the Arabs wouldn't last so long and would be on a "big war" scale.
Damn it Heaven Outcry Angel, you're gonna pray for Harry soon :lol
Perhaps but the palestinians would be elliminated. And I don't think either of us want that.
-
Y'know I actually stumbled upon a couple interesting blog posts about just that, written by this Palestinian guy Mudar Zahran. Apparently he's on the verge of becoming a big deal.
About how anti-Israel and anti-Semitic sentiments are also bad for Palestinians:
https://www.hudson-ny.org/1979/anti-semitism-20
And an interesting post about how national sovereignty independent of Israeli governance might be worse for Palestinians:
https://www.hudson-ny.org/2049/un-vote-palestinian-statehood
-
The conflict among the Arabs wouldn't last so long and would be on a "big war" scale.
Damn it Heaven Outcry Angel, you're gonna pray for Harry soon :lol
Perhaps but the palestinians would be elliminated. And I don't think either of us want that.
Would be eliminated?! Hell no. They will be sent back to their lands with the celebration doubled at 1) For Palestinians: End of occupation. 2) For Arabs: getting rid of the Palestinian refugees living in the other Arab countries. 3) For everyone else: The end of everything that made Muslim radicals flourish as a problem to the west for the last 60 years.
-
As Adami and others have said endlessly since I've been posting in P/R, if you think the Arabs hate the Jews a whole lot, you should see what happens when Jews are outta the picture.
-
What do you mean sent back? Jordan and egypt don't want them. And who would rule palestine? Especially after the other countries all want it for themsves.
-
Y'know I actually stumbled upon a couple interesting blog posts about just that, written by this Palestinian guy Mudar Zahran. Apparently he's on the verge of becoming a big deal.
About how anti-Israel and anti-Semitic sentiments are also bad for Palestinians:
https://www.hudson-ny.org/1979/anti-semitism-20
Is that guy is a Palestinian or a Muslim then I'm a Hindu priest and you're from Jupiter :laugh:
As Adami and others have said endlessly since I've been posting in P/R, if you think the Arabs hate the Jews a whole lot, you should see what happens when Jews are outta the picture.
I just said it in an earlier post. I'm as close to this as you guys and I know what you're talking about. You're right but not to the scale you're trying to make it sound.
-
What do you mean sent back? Jordan and egypt don't want them. And who would rule palestine? Especially after the other countries all want it for themsves.
Sent back to Palestine is what I said. And who wants Palestine for themselves?!
-
Oh jeez sorry, for some reason I keep mixing you up with mizzl. :p
Anyway I dunno, I'm just really concerned for where the Jewish story is going in the coming years of the 21st century. Things could either finally come around and Israel will once again be a safe haven for Jews in the next decade, or the culture will be gone in a century or two, the way things are going.
-
Oh jeez sorry, for some reason I keep mixing you up with mizzl. :p
Good God Super Dude. I'm not that fit! :lol
-
What do you mean sent back? Jordan and egypt don't want them. And who would rule palestine? Especially after the other countries all want it for themsves.
Sent back to Palestine is what I said. And who wants Palestine for themselves?!
Well syria/iran for one id think. Im sure jordan and egypt might want a bit of that. Its pretty valuable land. And there's no chance the palestinians will be able to take care of it themselves without a huge inner conflict which will be taken advantage of by surrounding neighbors.
-
Well syria/iran for one id think. Im sure jordan and egypt might want a bit of that. Its pretty valuable land. And there's no chance the palestinians will be able to take care of it themselves without a huge inner conflict which will be taken advantage of by surrounding neighbors.
I don't need to tell you Adami that Iran is of a different religion than 98% of Arabs. I might need to tell you that Sunna and Shiaas always were enemies, the conflict within Arabs you mentioned and I agreed about earlier would most probably be between a Hezbollah controlled Lebanon and a collation of Jordan, Syria and Palestine. Hezbollah of course being supported by the only other organized government that share the same beliefs; Iran.
Possibly slightly off topic: Iran is not an Arabic country. They don't speak or read Arabic neither can we speak or read their's. The concept of Shiaa Islam is fundamentally different from Sunni Islam. Sunni Muslims is what the greater majority of Arabs are.
I can speak for Egypt when I say nope, Egypt does not have any desire in Palestinian lands. I have never heard of an even remotely similar suggestion about Palestine and I've lived in Egypt all my life minus three.
Dunno about Jordan but Jordanians I know always speak of and dream of getting the Gollan heights back. I don't think that was ever a part of Palestine (may be i need to look that up).
Anyway I dunno, I'm just really concerned for where the Jewish story is going in the coming years of the 21st century. Things could either finally come around and Israel will once again be a safe haven for Jews in the next decade, or the culture will be gone in a century or two, the way things are going.
With all due respect SD I don't believe that you or any Jewish person believe that there's the slightest possibility of that happening within the century at least.
I'm not saying you're lying but it's like talking about a possible deterioration in health when you're in your best shape ever, just because you'll always be worried about the next big fall.
-
Oh I know Iran isn't arab. I meant more syria, but iran by proxy. But if you'd like I could ommend my original claim of arab countries with the more appropriate arab lands and persian by proxy.
You know, Persian by Proxy would be a sweet band name.
-
Anyway I dunno, I'm just really concerned for where the Jewish story is going in the coming years of the 21st century. Things could either finally come around and Israel will once again be a safe haven for Jews in the next decade, or the culture will be gone in a century or two, the way things are going.
With all due respect SD I don't believe that you or any Jewish person believe that there's the slightest possibility of that happening within the century at least.
I'm not saying you're lying but it's like talking about a possible deterioration in health when you're in your best shape ever because you'll always be worried about the next big fall.
At a time when the world is getting increasingly antisemitic, in some countries to the point of pre-WWII levels, and the political situation in Israel is itself deteriorating. Places like Amsterdam are considered no longer safe for Jewish residents, and Sweden has now been slapped with a travel advisory due to the danger of physical harm against Jews. Neo-Nazi groups have emerged even in Israel, of all places. Personally I think there's plenty of reason to be concerned.
-
SD. Replay this post in your head. How's any of this a danger to Israel? You own America dude. And the most powerful business men and corporations all over the world! Screw Holland and Sweden, you'll see what would happen to them if they get to the point where they're actually a "problem".
With regards to "neo nazis"; they have far greater problem than you to worry about: Muslims. And the people you speak cannot multi-hate objectively.
I'm not kidding, the far radical right of American and Europe are focused on Muslims and will always be as long as you keep them there. I actually saw a youtube comment by a German that said "Muslims to us are what Jews were to our ancestors". And this is exactly where the Zionist interests want and accomplished. Creating a big "other problem", I'm not saying no one hates Jews anymore but I'm saying that same person who might hate a Jew now is far more burdened by the Muslims. Product of media of course.
While the more civilized far rightists who might possibly hate Jews; would probably always be held back by Political correctness and fear of prosecution of these basis. They will -and do- find it much easier to hate on and attack Muslims because the backlash would never be as massive as doing so to Jews.
Of course we keep using the word Jews when it's more fair to say Zionists. But this too has become an antisemitic word as I've noticed recently to my surprise.
-
The difference is that you guys are over a billion strong while we have about 14 million. You guys aren't in danger of much. And you guys have been hated for a few decades, we're still a few millennia ahead of you. And no, just because you have some jewish friends and hate zionists, that doesn't mean the world is cool with jews but have a well thought out logical political objection to zionists. Im sure some do, but after the holocaust, its less acceptable to hate jews, so people have to cover it up.
-
you have some jewish friends and hate zionists, that doesn't mean the world is cool with jews but have a well thought out logical political objection to zionists.
Adami I can sincerely tell you I know a lot of people who are that way. Arabs and Americans, they are not rare at all.
-
you have some jewish friends and hate zionists, that doesn't mean the world is cool with jews but have a well thought out logical political objection to zionists.
Adami I can sincerely tell you I know a lot of people who are that way. Arabs and Americans, they are not rare at all.
Out of a population of 7 billion, everyone you know is rare.
It also doesn't have anything to do with my point. I know lots of people who don't hate jews, that doesn't mean a good part of the world doesn't. I also don't know a soul who hates arabs, but I'm not going to begin to pretend that you guys aren't the world scapegoats right now.
-
You own America dude. And the most powerful business men and corporations all over the world!
This sort of thinking is exactly why there's a problem. There may be a large number of big wigs in the world who are Jewish, but the historical but illogical step from there to "Jews rule the world" is exactly why world Jewry may be in danger.
Also what Adami said. Not everyone in the world is as educated or fair-minded as the people you, I, or Adami may keep company with.
-
Holy hell, is this for real Adami?
https://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/a-racist-messianic-rabbi-is-the-ruler-of-israel-1.370554
Home News Diplomacy & Defense
Published 02:11 01.07.11Latest update 02:11 01.07.11
A racist, messianic rabbi is the ruler of Israel
Rabbi of Kiryat Arba municipality, Dov Lior, returned from questioning on charges of incitement after publishing his approval of a book discussing when it is acceptable to kill non-Jews under Halacha, to his well-paid position and teaching at Nir hesder yeshiva. Without dramatic change in these matters, Israel will make all of its laws illegal.
By Sefi Rachlevsky
When King Lior parted from the evildoers, who had detained him for an hour of questioning, he turned to Mercaz Harav Yeshiva, where he was borne on the shoulders of those celebrating his messianic kingdom. Once again, he began to use the many official positions that entitle him to tens of thousands of shekels each month, and gave a class at the Nir hesder yeshiva (combining Torah studies with military service ) in Kiryat Arba, which he heads.
During chauvinistic and innocent times there was a saying used by the army: Every Jewish mother should know that she has handed her son over to worthy commanders. During the present time of repression, when the fawning "rule of law" takes prides in delaying kings for a very brief preliminary inquiry, every parent should know the repressed facts about Rabbi Dov Lior, the acting commander of numerous soldiers.
Menachem Livni, who was convicted of murders, headed a terror organization dubbed the "Jewish underground." He testified that the spirit behind the underground was Lior - and not just for his preaching and religious rulings regarding the need to murder Arabs or killing "innocent people." Lior, according to the testimony of the murderer, was involved in the details and decided how and when they would act. Lior pressured the hesitant perpetrators to blow up six buses with all their passengers. The buses were loaded with explosives with the object of killing hundreds. Only the delay enabled the Shin Bet security service to arrest them at the last minute.
The order came down: Lior was not to be arrested, tried or even seriously interrogated. The very belated and slight delay for an hour of questions relating to the book Torat Hamelech (The King's Torah ) is therefore ridiculous. It's even convenient for Lior. He's responsible for more important and extreme books. Lior does not stop at incitement.
Nor does Lior stop at non-Jews. Leading rabbis have testified that Lior was the source of rulings labeling the late Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin a "rodef" and a "moser" (a traitor who endangers Jewish lives ). Here, too, he didn't stop at incitement. Rabin's assassin used to travel to Hebron to see the rabbi. Baruch Goldstein (who massacred Arabs at the Cave of the Patriarchs in 1994 ) also visited King Lior for instruction. After he massacred dozens of people, the rabbi ruled that Goldstein was "holier than all the martyrs of the Holocaust."
The government is taking action. Twenty-five senior members of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's coalition, including its chairman and the chairman of the Knesset Constitution, Law and Justice Committee, ruled that a shocking deed had been done. How did they dare to investigate Rabbi Lior? Shocked, they demanded the full force of the law be used against Deputy State Prosecutor Shai Nitzan, who is bringing down the State Prosecutor's Office and the police.
And the ruler of the coalition? Upon returning as a victor from President Barack Obama, he went to Mercaz Harav. The featured speakers endorsed each other. And then the prime minister warmly thanked the rabbi who refuses to be investigated or to explain himself, as Lior and his disciples had given Netanyahu the strength to confront the American president. They are the elite commando unit leading the nation and paving the way, Netanyahu said.
Summer vacation begins today. Yesterday, most of the first graders who are defined in Israel as Jews were attending religious and ultra-Orthodox classes. Many of their educators receive a state salary to preach in the spirit of inflammatory and racist "Torat Hamelech." There's a reason why the "moderate" chief rabbis supported Lior.
It's not a one-hour delay that Israel needs. Without dramatic change here, the government is making all of its laws illegal. As long as hesder yeshivas like Nir are not dismantled; as long as rabbis who identify with Rabbi Lior are not ousted from their jobs; as long as funding for the present religious education is not stopped; as long as Lior's involvement in acts of murder, according to the testimony of the perpetrators, is not prosecuted, the country has no right to demand its citizens serve in the army or pay taxes. Until the change takes place, Israel is not a state.
-
Triple post wtf.
I find it hard to believe we're not discussing the whole UN statehood bid right now. And the fact that Palestine has been relatively quiet in terms of protests, demonstrations, and the like.
-
What are your thoughts on the issue?
-
My thoughts go as follows:
Bibi, don't fuck this up. The best damage control for Israel right now is to stop talking about the impending doom that awaits following Palestinian statehood.
Also, Abbas needs to work on either moderating or dissolving Hamas now because they unfortunately can prove Bibi's seemingly ludicrous fire 'n' brimstone talks right.
I have nothing more sophisticated than that to say because my only outlet for discussion so far has been my rightist (Israeli right) family. It would be great if I had someone else to bounce stuff off of for a change.
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-15635476
Sarkozy called Israeli PM Netanyahu 'liar'
French President Nicolas Sarkozy called Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a "liar" in remarks to US President Barack Obama overheard by journalists.
"I can't stand him any more, he's a liar," Mr Sarkozy said in French.
"You may be sick of him, but me, I have to deal with him every day," Mr Obama replied.
The exchange at the G20 summit was quoted by a French website, Arret sur Images, and confirmed by other media.
The remarks - during a private conversation - were overheard by a few journalists last week but were not initially reported, the BBC's Christian Fraser in Paris says.
Journalists at the bilateral press conference had been handed translation boxes but had been told not to plug in their headphones until the backroom conversation had finished. But those who did heard the revealing comments.
For several days there was media silence in France about the exchange - a decision had been taken not to embarrass the French president, our correspondent says.
A correspondent for Le Monde newspaper referred to the conversation without the quotes.
But Israeli newspapers have reported it in full.
It is said Mr Obama was taking Mr Sarkozy to task for voting in favour of the Palestinian bid for full membership of the UN cultural organisation, Unesco, a bid that was approved despite American opposition.
The remarks indicate a breakdown of trust with the Israeli leader which could have wider implications for the Middle East peace process, our correspondent says.
:corn
-
https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/israeli-minister-rule-iran-strike-14902523#.Trl8w0OAqU8
The only way that an Israeli attack on Iran would be justified in the slightest would be if they they admit that they themselves have nuclear weapons, get rid of them all and sign on to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Israel has absolutely no say in whether other countries can develop nuclear their nuclear technologies or not... they're among the world's worst examples in this respect.
-
From what I can see, their reasoning for possibly attacking actually has very little to do with the IAEA, and much more to do with the Iranian establishment's official position towards Israel. It would be analog to their attack on Osirak about 30 years ago, deterrence and all that. Think of it as a modern-day Cuban missile crisis.
-
From what I can see, their reasoning for possibly attacking actually has very little to do with the IAEA, and much more to do with the Iranian establishment's official position towards Israel.
But does the timing make sense? From what I know Ahmadinejad blurted something out about destroying Israel or something a few years ago but has anything developed since? I don't see any Cuban missile crises here.
-
From what I can see, their reasoning for possibly attacking actually has very little to do with the IAEA, and much more to do with the Iranian establishment's official position towards Israel.
But does the timing make sense? From what I know Ahmadinejad blurted something out about destroying Israel or something a few years ago but has anything developed since? I don't see any Cuban missile crises here.
he's always saying that shit... the guy is a nutjob. These countries need to fight it out and get it over with.
-
From what I can see, their reasoning for possibly attacking actually has very little to do with the IAEA, and much more to do with the Iranian establishment's official position towards Israel.
But does the timing make sense? From what I know Ahmadinejad blurted something out about destroying Israel or something a few years ago but has anything developed since? I don't see any Cuban missile crises here.
I mean you're right, I think the timing has something to do with the fact that:
A) From then until now, we were fairly certain Iran was developing nuclear technology despite the threat of sanctions but there was no proof. Now proof has come out.
B) Israel is facing its own brand of "Occupy" type movements as of late.
From what I can see, their reasoning for possibly attacking actually has very little to do with the IAEA, and much more to do with the Iranian establishment's official position towards Israel.
But does the timing make sense? From what I know Ahmadinejad blurted something out about destroying Israel or something a few years ago but has anything developed since? I don't see any Cuban missile crises here.
he's always saying that shit... the guy is a nutjob. These countries need to fight it out and get it over with.
That I cannot abide by. Think of the people who will have to suffer and die to "get it over with," on both sides. It's bad enough the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has lasted this long.
-
you mean like the people that died in 9/11? The thing is this conflict is dragging down the entire world. Not just a few countries...
-
Uhhhhh not everything needs to be resolved with violence. This is not the middle ages.
-
Uhhhhh not everything needs to be resolved with violence. This is not the middle ages.
-
I hope it can, but I am getting sick of the US incurring the collateral damage. Those that arent involved should get out of the way, this is bettween peoples other than ourselves.
-
You seem to be forgetting all the military bases and other presences we've had in each of these countries for many decades, which are more due to Persian Gulf oil interests than anything involving Israel (a recent study actually showed that for all the rhetoric thrown around by Syrian and Egyptian leadership and whatnot, Israel's actions actually have a very minimal effect on Arab nations' foreign policy).
-
Im not forgetting any of that. Don't mix in the issues... This is a territorial issue in which we really have no say.
-
Im not forgetting any of that. Don't mix in the issues... This is a territorial issue in which we really have no say.
Your the one mixing the issues by saying 9/11 is a result of American support for Israel.
-
Im not forgetting any of that. Don't mix in the issues... This is a territorial issue in which we really have no say.
Your the one mixing the issues by saying 9/11 is a result of American support for Israel.
According to bin laden it was:
"The expansion of Israel is one of the greatest crimes, and you are the leaders of its criminals. And of course there is no need to explain and prove the degree of American support for Israel. The creation of Israel is a crime which must be erased. Each and every person whose hands have become polluted in the contribution towards this crime must pay its price, and pay for it heavily."
I believe if we had a hands off policy in Israel we wouldnt have been attacked.
-
God thats such bullshit.
-
And what do you think the dollar cost of our being involved in Israel is. We have no dog in this race, if we should be involved in this fight than I see no reason why we shouldn't have a fully interventionist attitude in other areas. This is the problem, we dont have any core international philosophy. We shoot from the hip concerning what issues we become involved in, and which ones we dont. US has a very incoherent strategy/philosophy.
Its funny I was just reading that George Marshall was telling Truman way back that he believed creating Israel would mean war in the middle east. Also, that Truman was perhaps inclined to support the state to garner Jewish support before the election against dewey...
I dont know about the second part, but it makes sense. Anyways it seems he was right on with the first part.
-
I think tonight I'll be sharing a research paper I wrote for Harvard classes this summer just to show you how wrongheaded that is.
-
How wrong what is? What kind of comments are those? "thats such bullshit" & "how wrongheaded you are". Why even post that? post your argument, dont post crap like that.
-
I will explain tonight.
-
How wrong what is? What kind of comments are those? "thats such bullshit" & "how wrongheaded you are". Why even post that? post your argument, dont post crap like that.
Agreed. PLM and SD: there are less insulting ways to express disagreement.
-
Im not forgetting any of that. Don't mix in the issues... This is a territorial issue in which we really have no say.
Your the one mixing the issues by saying 9/11 is a result of American support for Israel.
According to bin laden it was:
"The expansion of Israel is one of the greatest crimes, and you are the leaders of its criminals. And of course there is no need to explain and prove the degree of American support for Israel. The creation of Israel is a crime which must be erased. Each and every person whose hands have become polluted in the contribution towards this crime must pay its price, and pay for it heavily."
I believe if we had a hands off policy in Israel we wouldnt have been attacked.
We could have supported Israel forever, but it was our bases and our meddling in Saudi affairs that angered Osama the most, and our support of the Mujaheddin in Afghanistan that actually allowed for the attacks to happen. Israel was a minor role in it all, probably more to garner support and radical, than anything Osama actually felt.
-
Quotes from my paper, with citations and the like at the end:
Together with a chronically low opinion of the U.S. within the Middle East, including disapproval of its association with Israel,(6/7) the Obama administration’s impatience with the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and his coolness with PM Netanyahu is easily understood, even if – as I believe – it has a much smaller impact on actual regional instability than the U.S. presence itself (a Pew Global Attitudes Project report in 2007 showed that all countries polled, especially in the Middle East, believed America’s foreign policy motives were oriented more towards oil interests than Israeli ones).(8)
things are changing in the Middle East and “it's a matter of time before Washington forfeits its license to steer the Mideast agenda (Opall-Rome 2011).” Sources point directly to the Arab Spring and its uprooting of formerly pro-Western regimes, a trend whose roots are not in America’s relationship with Israel but in its actions in the rest of the Middle East to combat terrorism and control Persian Gulf oil, both of which are accomplished by supporting authoritarian governments who then reciprocate by supporting these goals in their own countries.(10) There is a growing sense in the Middle East that America “is no longer the global policeman (Opall-Rome 2011),” and among Israeli public officials in particular, that “Washington's destabilizing effect on pro-Western neighboring regimes and its unsuccessful attempts to pressure a Palestinian peace obliges Israel to broaden its alliances…should a declining U.S. choose to turn its back on Israel (Opall-Rome 2011).”
They see Israel as a liability instead of a partner, a damaging relationship the U.S. has allowed to survive well past reasonable limits.
Their conclusion however is flawed for two reasons: first, because despite the great amount of influence the lobby may have on policymakers, Israel is far from “get[ting] their way (Lindsay 2002),” and second, because the U.S. does have tangible interests in aligning their policies with the lobby. The first of these is easy to prove: despite the strength of the lobby, American foreign policy does not cater exclusively to Israeli interests but to the interests of both the Israeli and Palestinian parties, in the interest of creating a peace that is mutually beneficial. In order to do so, “[t]he United States sells high-tech weaponry to neighboring Arab states, pushes Israel to trade land for peace, and refuses to move the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem (Lindsay 2002),” in addition to requesting settlement freezes. Generally speaking, the U.S. appears to give Israel leeway in certain circumstances, but support for Israel is not unconditional.
This bit is more oratory than anything, but I thought it was an important thing to have in mind while reading what follows:
But like making an investment, over time high risk yields high returns, and the huge financial and political support the U.S. has given Israel for most of its existence has and will continue to pay for itself, a payoff that manifests itself in economic, military, intelligence, and will appear in the future by way of environmental interests.
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mullen discussed the many combat and intelligence contributions Israel made to the Iraq War and conflicts in Afghanistan that enabled U.S. forces to withstand terrorist and insurgent attacks. U.S. special operations forces were able to draw on “Israeli battle tactics and 61 year counter-terrorism experience (Ettinger 2010)” and technology such as an Israeli unmanned air vehicle that “provides intelligence otherwise unobtainable, preempting terrorists, thus saving many lives (Ettinger 2010).” Senator Daniel Inouye, who has previous experience in the Intelligence Committee, describes “Israel's contribution to US military intelligence [as] greater than all NATO countries combined (Ettinger 2010).” In addition, when Israel receives new military technology from the U.S. it improves upon it, “enhancing the competitive edge of the US defense industries, expanding US employment and export base, [and] upgrading US national security (Ettinger 2010).”
the effect of Israel’s absence would have a noticeable impact on U.S. Mideast policy. General Alexander Haig has remarked that “Israel [is] ‘the largest, most battle-tested and cost-effective US aircraft carrier, which does not require a single US personnel, cannot be sunk and is located at a most critical area for US national security interests (Ettinger 2010).” Its location in the Mediterranean at the “intersection of Europe, Asia and Africa (Ettinger 2010),” in the case of Israel’s non-existence or non-alliance, would require “the US…to deploy a few aircraft carriers to the region, along with tens of thousands of military personnel, costing scores of billions of dollars annually and risking involvement in additional regional and international confrontations (Ettinger 2010).” Thus Israel secures America’s regional interests through its own efforts, freeing American foreign policy of a burden only noticeable in its loss.
Israel holds the rare distinction of being “second to only the Silicon Valley area in terms of venture capital start-up investment (de Haan 2011),” especially in the technology sectors; of possessing a strongly entrepreneurial culture; and of leading the world in residential use of solar technology at ninety percent.(16)
In May 2011, the chairman of the National Economics Council presented in Washington “Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's plan, approved by the cabinet in January, to develop oil alternatives, including biofuels, synthetics, electric cars, and energy efficient vehicles…[through] international cooperation (Wiessman 2011).” The NEC chairman, Professor Eugene Kandel, emphasizes in such a deal “a complete meeting of interests, because the objective of the Israeli plan is to reduce dependency of the US and the whole world, not just by Israel (Wiessman 2011),” referring to the need to reduce the world’s dependence on oil as the single source of end-use fuel. Beyond solving problems of future energy demands, environmental costs (a desirable interest turning vital), economic considerations (especially concerning an eventual oil production peak), and other concerns, such a plan represents nothing short of a positive-sum deal.
In addition to the added bonus of giving America the image of leading the green tech revolution, strategic considerations come into play: less dependence on oil in general means less reliance on Middle East imports in particular, potentially removing control of Persian Gulf oil as a vital interest altogether. If the U.S. does not require Middle East oil imports, the utility of a local U.S. presence (i.e. military bases) will be greatly diminished(17)
Citations:
Art, Robert. "Geopolitics Updated: The Strategy of Selective Engagement." https://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic934673.files/Art%20Selective%20Engagement%20Strategy.pdf
Ettinger, Yoram. "A two-way street." YNet News (2010): Web. 24 Jul 2011. <https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3851844,00.html>.
Groll, Elias. "White House presses Congress on Palestinian aid." Politico (2011): Web. 28 Jul 2011. <https://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/58821.html>.
Khalidi, Rashid. "The Arab Spring." The Nation (2011): Web. 14 Jul 2011. <https://www.thenation.com/article/158991/arab-spring>.
Morris, Benny. "America and Israel: the end of a special relationship." Telegraph UK (2010): Web. 18 Jul 2011. <https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/7531122/America-and-Israel-the-end-of-a-special-relationship.html>.
Opall-Rome, Barbara. "Hedging Against America." DefenseNews (2011): Web. 14 Jul 2011. <https://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=5699414>.
Wiessman, Lilach. "Israel seeks US support for ending oil dependency." Globes (2011): Web. 27 Jul 2011. <https://www.globes.co.il/serveen/globes/docview.asp?did=1000651293&fid=1725>.
Del Chiaro, Bernadette, and Timothy Telleen-Lawton. United States. Solar Water Heating: How California Can Reduce Its Dependence on Natural Gas. Los Angeles: Environment California Research & Policy Center, 2007. Web. 27 Jul 2011. <https://www.environmentcalifornia.org/uploads/at/56/at563bKwmfrtJI6fKl9U_w/Solar-Water-Heating.pdf>.
United States. America's Image in the World: Findings from the Pew Global Attitudes Project. 2007. Web. 19 Jul 2011. <https://pewglobal.org/2007/03/14/americas-image-in-the-world-findings-from-the-pew-global-attitudes-project/>.
United States. Obama More Popular Abroad Than At Home, Global Image of U.S. Continues to Benefit. 2010. Web. 20 Jul 2011. <https://pewglobal.org/2010/06/17/obama-more-popular-abroad-than-at-home/3/>.
Mikkelsen, Brian. Denmark. 2010 Entrepreneurship Index. Copenhagen: The Danish Enterprise and Construction Authority, 2010. Web. 26 Jul 2011. <https://www.ebst.dk/publikationer/ivaerksaettere/Entrepreneurship%20Index%202010/kap05.htm>.
de Haan, Uzi. "Economic Growth through Entrepreneurship and Innovation; Key Factors for Success: The Israel High-tech Experience." Entrepreneurship & Innovation: The Israel High-Tech Experience. Spreenkler. UW Milwaukee Arts Center Lecture Hall 2400 E. Kenwood Blvd., Milwaukee, WI. 15 Apr 2011. Lecture.
I'd also like to point out that a sizable percentage of the aid the U.S. sends to Israel, Israel then gives to Palestine.
-
I dont particularly see how israels rhetoric concerning devloping green energy, or their tech sector really effects whether osama attacked us because of us in Israel. Moreover, the fact that Israel act as a cheap airbase isn't enough to convince me getting into a fight that isn't in our interest. I bet if we supported Palestine, they would allow us to use their land an aircraft carrier in the middle east, as that general who was quoted said.
Here it is from the horses mouth. An exerpt from his letter to america:
"(Q1) Why are we fighting and opposing you?
Q2)What are we calling you to, and what do we want from you?
As for the first question: Why are we fighting and opposing you? The answer is very simple:
(1) Because you attacked us and continue to attack us.
a) You attacked us in Palestine:
(i) Palestine, which has sunk under military occupation for more than 80 years. The British handed over Palestine, with your help and your support, to the Jews, who have occupied it for more than 50 years; years overflowing with oppression, tyranny, crimes, killing, expulsion, destruction and devastation. The creation and continuation of Israel is one of the greatest crimes, and you are the leaders of its criminals. And of course there is no need to explain and prove the degree of American support for Israel. The creation of Israel is a crime which must be erased. Each and every person whose hands have become polluted in the contribution towards this crime must pay its*price, and pay for it heavily.
(ii) It brings us both laughter and tears to see that you have not yet tired of repeating your fabricated lies that the Jews have a historical right to Palestine, as it was promised to them in the Torah. Anyone who disputes with them on this alleged fact is accused of anti-semitism. This is one of the most fallacious, widely-circulated fabrications in history. The people of Palestine are pure Arabs and original Semites. It is the Muslims who are the inheritors of Moses (peace be upon him) and the inheritors of the real Torah that has not been changed. Muslims believe in all of the Prophets, including Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allah be upon them all. If the followers of Moses have been promised a right to Palestine in the Torah, then the Muslims are the most worthy nation of this.
When the Muslims conquered Palestine and drove out the Romans, Palestine and Jerusalem returned to Islaam, the religion of all the Prophets peace be upon them. Therefore, the call to a historical right to Palestine cannot be raised against the Islamic Ummah that believes in all the Prophets of Allah (peace and blessings be upon them) - and we make no distinction between them.
(iii) The blood pouring out of Palestine must be equally revenged. You must know that the Palestinians do not cry alone; their women are not widowed alone; their sons are not orphaned alone."
He does mention things like somalia, etc... but a great portion is dedicated to Israel. I am not saying that their attacks on us are soley because of Israel, but it seems an overwhelming portion of it can be attributed to our involvment in Israel vs. Palestine.
-
Okay, but again, I'm not sure if I mentioned it already but a recent study actually found a weak relationship between Israel's actions or behaviors (IV) and actual policies or actions taken by Arab governments (DV, as separated from obviously inciteful rhetoric).
-
Just wanted to add this because it's a pretty important new development: https://www.haaretz.com/blogs/strenger-than-fiction/mahmoud-abbas-crucial-message-to-israel-1.393351
Also livehard in my paper I do acknowledge Osama bin Laden's statements, I just didn't think it was important to mention, especially with this study coming out that renders the point moot.
-
We could have supported Israel forever, but it was our bases and our meddling in Saudi affairs that angered Osama the most, and our support of the Mujaheddin in Afghanistan that actually allowed for the attacks to happen. Israel was a minor role in it all, probably more to garner support and radical, than anything Osama actually felt.
Agreed. Frankly, as I've said all along, what Bin Laden employed for his cause and what he actually thought are two very different things. I've no doubt that plenty of them are pissed off about our blind support of Israel and I don't blame them, but I also don't think it's 1/10th as simple as being the root cause of all of their animosity.
Anyhoo, I don't have much problem with Iran developing their nuke program. I don't find Israel to be any less belligerent in that regard, so it's reasonable deterrence. And to be fair, I understand why Israel would be pretty damned hesitant to abandon their own nukes, so I'm certainly not blaming them for the current situation (at least this particular aspect of it).
-
I would say the American right's support for Israel is pretty blind and unswerving, but I don't think you can say that about the nation as a whole, let alone our government. I mean just look at the Obama-Netanyahu relationship, certainly not the closest of friends.
-
I wonder what would happen with the US-Israel relationship if the money/contribution factor got cut out of lobbying ::) I can see the military aid go poof real fast.
-
I wonder what would happen with the US-Israel relationship if the money/contribution factor got cut out of lobbying ::) I can see the military aid go poof real fast.
Nah. Florida's still too important a swing state.
I would say the American right's support for Israel is pretty blind and unswerving, but I don't think you can say that about the nation as a whole, let alone our government. I mean just look at the Obama-Netanyahu relationship, certainly not the closest of friends.
Politics are based on practicality, not friendship. Whether or not they like each other has no bearing whatsoever on foreign policy.
-
If this discussion is about why Arabs hate America then yes it's because of the support of Israeli occupation and actions. The settlements, the sieges and American UN vetos.
If the discussion is why radical Muslims wanna fight America then yes it's the U.S presence in the middle east which no matter how their friend or enemy would justify it; is still mainly there for protection of Israel. Be that wrong or right; it's the national Arabic belief. Most normal people never even heard or considered the "it's for oil" theory. Speaking from an Arabic Muslim stand point, living and working with the people, That's how they see it.
My personal belief is similar only without the angry vibe. I know normal Americans have nothing to do with it and mostly either don't grasp it or in denial about it. I also know it's not an optional matter for the governments of the U.S. Yet the whole thing doesn't anger me that way.
I understand that Zionists are the most influential entity in the world because they made it happen. I'm not saying they're the only ones of the sort but they're miles ahead of everyone else. They outsmarted everyone and remained focused and loyal to their cause regardless of the means. That's gotta impress you on some level no matter how vindictive it should make you feel.
I know it's hard for a lot of people both in the Arab and Western world to disassociate Zionist mentality from moderate Jewish one. But it's just as hard for a whole lot of people to disassociate radical Islam from moderate one or even radical right wing mentality from merely conservative one (in internal U.S politics).
-
I wonder what would happen with the US-Israel relationship if the money/contribution factor got cut out of lobbying ::) I can see the military aid go poof real fast.
Nah. Florida's still too important a swing state.
:huh:
What I meant was that AIPAC would loose considerable influence on politicians from both parties. The only Americans that care about the US-Israel friends-with-benefits gig are Evangelicals and Jews.
-
That's sad. Israel is not a bad country. Yes, their policy towards the Palestinians is terrible but that's not worth vilifying an entire country.
I wonder what would happen with the US-Israel relationship if the money/contribution factor got cut out of lobbying ::) I can see the military aid go poof real fast.
Nah. Florida's still too important a swing state.
I would say the American right's support for Israel is pretty blind and unswerving, but I don't think you can say that about the nation as a whole, let alone our government. I mean just look at the Obama-Netanyahu relationship, certainly not the closest of friends.
Politics are based on practicality, not friendship. Whether or not they like each other has no bearing whatsoever on foreign policy.
I should probably post the rest of my paper to show why they don't like each other and why it does have a bearing on their respective foreign policies.
Also it's really hard to support/back proponents of the peace process on the left wing when their rhetoric concerning Israel is so venomous. It's like I'm being shot at by both sides.
And as a second "also," let's try to separate the term Zionist from the hawkish Messianic Zionists who are building all the settlements and whatnot. There are also a lot of Zionists out there, like myself, who believe in and badly want peaceful co-existence. I'm a Zionist in the sense that I believe Israel has a right to exist and should exist, that Jews as a nation and not as a religion have a right to call Israel a Jewish nation (once again making the distinction that it is a state for the Jews as a people, not as religious adherents), and that Israel is important because its continuing to exist will allow the emergence of what it means to be a modern Jew.
I don't believe Israel is infallible or that the cause is totally righteous, but I do believe the state has a right to exist in peace alongside Palestine (and basically that they should be able to expect Palestine to maintain peaceful relations, and rein in those who try to break the peace), just as Palestine is entitled to recognition of its legitimate statehood and peace alongside Israel (and expect that Israel will not encroach on their territory or conduct military operations).
-
Then I could totally understand you wanting to use your own private property or personally fighting for the Israeli state. But I dont understand why politicans should force me or any other citizen to give money to Israel while also risking (albeit a small probability) death through retaliation by terrorists.
Nobody helped the Irish out when they were fighting the British, or the other countless cases where people fought over territory. We shouldn't have gotten involved in this after WWII and its my opinion its high time to get out of there and let them sort it out for themselves.
-
Did you even read the quotes I pulled from my research? Israel is one of America's best intelligence and military tech partners in the world (and military training too), and with the largest solar and electric car initiatives in the world, provides a great avenue to a cheap transition away from oil (meaning fewer reasons to be in the Middle East in the first place).
I wish Adami would come back. He knew a lot more than I do.
Also, I'm not saying America is or should be forced to do anything, but as leader of the free world people do expect America to do something.
-
I never thought I'd say this, but goddammit Jews:
https://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/a-new-israel-in-the-making-1.395241
The good news is Jews in Israel and Diaspora alike are waking up to how ridiculous the Israeli right is. Hopefully AIPAC will find some way to advocate for the left and influence Israeli politics in that way.
-
Hopefully AIPAC will find some way to advocate for the left and influence Israeli politics in that way.
AIPAC??? Pretty sure that's the last thing AIPAC would want to do. JStreet!!
-
We'll see with JStreet. I don't know the full picture with them, and they're still pretty small anyway. Not to mention my own political inclinations lie with neither them totally nor AIPAC, but somewhere in between.
-
https://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=257168
US officials say the assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists have been carried out by an Iranian opposition group with logistical and financial support from the Mossad, NBC News reported Thursday.
The report was based on a testimony by one of Iranian Ayotollah Ali Khamenei's senior advisers who detailed the intimate relationship between Israel and the opposition group MEK, which "two senior US officials" confirmed as accurate.
Khamenei's aide, Mohammad Javad Larijani, was quoted by NBC as saying "They (Israelis) are paying … the Mujahedin. Some of their (MEK) agents … (are) providing Israel with information. And they recruit and also manage logistical support.”
Larijani explained that because Israel does not have "direct access" into Iran, the Mossad works with the Iranian dissident group, which operates in Iran and also has agents in Iraq.
One of the two senior US officials that confirmed the Iranian accusations regarding Israel's close relationship with MEK said that all the "inclinations" in Larijani's remarks were "correct."
This obviously isn't a surprise to anyone with a clue. I just like pointing out the hypocrisy of all of this terrorism nonsense. We all support it and we all like it, as long as it's for a cause we like. The only difference between a terrorist and a freedom fighter is who's side you're on.
-
I made that exact same observation here sometime ago in not-as-good English.
There was some other not-terrorism news I dunno of anyone noticed but this (https://www.cnn.com/2012/01/21/us/jewish-president-threat/index.html?hpt=hp_t2) was big for a couple of days two weeks ago for the very limited mention it got, compared to usual reaction the press would have made out of it.
-
I'm not entirely sure a random guy in Atlanta Georgia represents much of the state of Israel.
As to El Barto's point, the second I heard about that assassination I knew it was Israel. I'm pretty sure I facepalmed for a good 5 minutes following it. I love my country, always will, but I am 100% against the entire governing body and really think Israel needs a revolution....now.
-
I'm not entirely sure a random guy in Atlanta Georgia represents much of the state of Israel.
As to El Barto's point, the second I heard about that assassination I knew it was Israel. I'm pretty sure I facepalmed for a good 5 minutes following it. I love my country, always will, but I am 100% against the entire governing body and really think Israel needs a revolution....now.
Pretty much this. If Israel and America could simultaneously overcome (or at least come to some sort of compromise with) the political grip of their respective right-wing elements, all would be right with the world imo.
-
I'm not entirely sure a random guy in Atlanta Georgia represents much of the state of Israel.
As to El Barto's point, the second I heard about that assassination I knew it was Israel. I'm pretty sure I facepalmed for a good 5 minutes following it. I love my country, always will, but I am 100% against the entire governing body and really think Israel needs a revolution....now.
Adami, please stay. We need more Colombian and Zionist bonding. Together we could rule the world.
Also, I'm not saying America is or should be forced to do anything, but as leader of the free world people do expect America to do something.
Oh my God.
-
I never said that America should (or shouldn't, because I personally don't know where I stand) get involved, only that the international community usually expects we will or ought to.
-
To be honest I am not sure what can really be discussed in this thread. The people who hate Israel will complain, while the rest of us will simply say that the government sucks. In fact, I'm pretty sure no one likes the current government outside of the current government.
It's sad that the only democracy in the middle east has decided to ignore the will of the people.
-
True, although to be fair, numerous Western democracies are facing the same problem today, US being no exception.
But yeah, this is no different from the Global Warming/Climate Change thread: just a push/pull between skeptics and environmentalists.
That said, let's discuss this article I found: https://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/a-new-peace-is-needed-1.411838
"The old peace is dead, a new, realistic peace is needed." Too bad the author doesn't give any suggestions as to how this can be done.
-
Power balance, peer-to-peer talks. That's new and just for a change.
-
A great post from our very own Adami:
Anyway, so I've had some fantasies recently about moving back to Israel (actually pretty realistic) and trying to start some kind of pro-unity thing against the government (not as realistic). I have the image of covering Tel Aviv or Haifa in posters saying "What happened to our country?"
Superdude, you want in?
Also, covering Jerusalem in ירושלים של זהב לא של דם would be pretty awesome.
I like the "What happened to our country?" bit, especially considering early Zionists actually would've emphasized peace and coexistence (as hard as that may be to believe).
-
Nobody helped the Irish out when they were fighting the British...
USA via NORAID? https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1563119.stm
-
Seems we're having a little domestic trouble:
https://www.haaretz.com/news/national/netanyahu-cabinet-agrees-israeli-elections-to-be-held-september-4-1.428672
Hopefully this provides an opportunity to shake things up, maybe get Livni that seat finally.
-
Seems we're having a little domestic trouble:
https://www.haaretz.com/news/national/netanyahu-cabinet-agrees-israeli-elections-to-be-held-september-4-1.428672
Hopefully this provides an opportunity to shake things up, maybe get Livni that seat finally.
Aww poor idealistic Super Dude. I feel for you. No, it's not meant to shake things up. They're being held in September, because Bibi knows he'll win that early. It's a ploy to stay in power, nothing more. And didn't Livni resign from K'neset?
-
Well this Livni business is news to me. And yes, that does suck. Adami, I think we need to start designing those posters.
-
Well this Livni business is news to me. And yes, that does suck. Adami, I think we need to start designing those posters.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-17908446
-
Well, at least now the idea is getting out that the problem is the ultra-Orthodox, not necessarily all of Israel.
-
Well, at least now the idea is getting out that the problem is the ultra-Orthodox, not necessarily all of Israel.
We need an island to send them to.
-
Could send 'em to the Aelutians, Alaskans will love 'em.
On a more serious note, this absolutely flabbergasts me: https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/it-is-high-time-to-close-israel-s-rabbinical-courts-1.428611
-
Could send 'em to the Aelutians, Alaskans will love 'em.
On a more serious note, this absolutely flabbergasts me: https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/it-is-high-time-to-close-israel-s-rabbinical-courts-1.428611
The law that exempts the ultra-orthodox from doing....anything, isn't going anywhere. It will be brought up, and then used as a means to rally those votes for Bibi who will immediately make sure that it stands strong.
I'm more concerned about Israel being a dictatorship. Banning protesters, no longer punishing soldiers who break the law, making grossly illegal rulings regarding the settlements and now completely ignoring the dying Palestinian hunger strikers who's only complain is that they're being held without charge.
-
Yeeep, I love Israel and all but it's getting harder and harder to defend them. I'm just hoping this will be a South Korea moment and at some point the spontaneous strike movements will start up.
-
The issue of the 1800 Palestinian prisoners on hunger strike is about to be resolved I guess. Source (https://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5g-__6oiGp_J1bQ7cA1aeUdmsx36w?docId=CNG.33dfdf92f197b303c9a7053e17b8f902.61) and
source 2 (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/05/2012513232959609755.html)
Holy mighty complete fuckin black out in Western media btw Batman, this is the biggest thing in the middle east right now and have been for a week, almost overshadowing the Egyptian presidential race. Some of these people have been on the hunger strike for 74 days.
-
The issue of the 1800 Palestinian prisoners on hunger strike is about to be resolved I guess. Source (https://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5g-__6oiGp_J1bQ7cA1aeUdmsx36w?docId=CNG.33dfdf92f197b303c9a7053e17b8f902.61) and
source 2 (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/05/2012513232959609755.html)
Holy mighty complete fuckin black out in Western media btw Batman, this is the biggest thing in the middle east right now and have been for a week, almost overshadowing the Egyptian presidential race. Some of these people have been on the hunger strike for 74 days.
It's a deal, but the biggest deal in the Middle East? Really? Nah. Egypt wins over that, and to be honest...SO DOES SYRIA. Why the hell is Syria being completely ignored? And I'm glad they resolved (though it shouldn't even have been an issue, since no country should hold people without charge like that).
-
I don't see an end in sight for Syria tbh.
-
I don't see an end in sight for Syria tbh.
I have quite a few thoughts on the matter, but I keep them to myself in fear of being yelled at by everyone and then probably banned.
So I will say that I hope for the sake of my Syrian cousins, that this ends and soon. The middle east has enough blood in its roots as it is.
-
holy shit
https://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=iPQI6Yupt48
Having been to a lot of those places only made that preview more amazing. Hopefully the film is void of political agendas and is objective as possible.
-
My internet is slow as shit and not really loading the video. What's it about?
-
My internet is slow as shit and not really loading the video. What's it about?
Israel.
-
Is that right? I never woulda guessed. :P
-
Is that right? I never woulda guessed. :P
lol, well there's not actually much else to it. It's AMAZINGLY beautiful shots of random parts of Israel and a British woman talking about how amazing Israel's history is. However it did make me very VERY home sick.
-
Are you planning on going back at any point soon?
-
Are you planning on going back at any point soon?
Actually I am very very seriously considering moving back there.
-
Here's a lil' gem from my Facebook:
OP: Kfar Sava hospital bans teaching staff from speaking in Arabic - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News
Link: https://www.haaretz.com/news/national/kfar-sava-hospital-bans-teaching-staff-from-speaking-in-arabic-1.431165
Israeli 1: This article is misleading. No one banned the teachers from speaking Arabic, not the hospital nor the ministry of education. Just some nut somewhere along the chain of command who is yet to be identified (making me think maybe that individual teacher just made it up).
Israeli 2: "This is supposed to be an ideal place for coexistence, where the two peoples can meet, and need each other's support to get through the ordeal in one piece." Translation: This is supposed to be an ideal place for us to leech off of the Jewish State while bad mouthing Israelis and Nakbaing whenever we feel like it while Jews get nothing but hatred from us in return.
On a side note - Meir Hospital is a cesspool and this "Supervisor" is clearly the chief shit. Arabic is an official language in this country so he can go straight to hell. Racist arsehole.
Israeli OP: The same thing happened a few months ago at if i remember correctly one of the hardware store chains where they also banned employees from speaking Arabic at the workplace - utter bullshit.
They should therefore ban Russian too!!!!
Israeli 2: They have banned Russian somewhere but that is perfectly understandable if its NOT an official language. Look I am no friend of our 5th column but their rights are their rights and Israel is becoming a little bit too racist for my liking.
-
And in yet another bout of awfulness:
https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4230954,00.html
Basically, the IDF (Israeli Defense Force) arrested 474 deserters and draft dodgers in 6 days. I love this country very much, but goddamn does it embarrass me sometimes.