US vetoes UN measure against Israeli settlement building

[Ritterin Sophia]

Fifty percent of what land, dumbass? And 33% of what population? Modern day Israel? The British Mandate? The Ottoman Empire? How far back do you want to go? Over a dozen countries were carved out of that area, most of them in the early twentieth century. Way to selectively ignore history to support your opinion though, that's some impressive ignorance. Not to mention your fucked up idea of what constitutes terrorism.

Learn to read. In the late 19th Century there were under ten thousand Jews in that particular area, by the founding of Israel there were over 800,000 of which only 35% were even native. Meaning the vast majority of Jews at the foundation of Israel were either European Jews who had never been to Palestine or their children. Meanwhile, despite making up only 33% of the British Mandate's populace, they got half of the territory. I also find it hilarious that you seem to claim the King David, Rehovat Train, and Bevingrad Officer's Club bombings weren't terrorist acts.

Note I said this as an example for why continuing the cycle of acting like cunts because the other guys were cunts is a bad idea. I also added that it's irrelevant for anything except establishing that the cycle continues unabated and why it's not helping anyone, since you can no more take all of Israel back than we Natives here in America can take it back.

Oh boo-hoo, the Palestinians are the only people who were ever wronged. Yeah fucking right. Where was this outrage when all the Arab countries rejected every offer Israel ever made (until it was obvious they couldn't destroy Israel outright)? Get your head out of your ass and get back to me when you've learned some fucking history.

You repeating the same bullshit you said earlier is not an actual argument, someone else acting bad does not justify your poor behavior. The Palestinians offered the Israelis every god damn thing they had ever ask for including the illegal settlements that never belonged to them in the first place, for self-determination to conduct their own affairs. They gave Israel everything they could and Israel decided it wasn't enough. One can only conclude then, that Israel does not desire peace with the Palestinians, but the subjugation of them.

But this isn't an ideal world, and however much it may suck, we have to live in reality. And the reality is, the Palestinian authorities are incapable of controlling their own populace. When that happens, let me know, and I'll be the first one to support their independence.

Are you really that fucking stupid? Palestine can not control their own populace because Israel will not allow them the means to do so! They are not allowed to raise their own military to secure the borders because Israel is occupying them, they can not build checkpoints because building materials are blocked by the Israelis.

[Zaune]

The Pallies are fucked. The ones in Gaza I guess can siphon into Egypt. The others, I don't know. At this point I can't see anything, certainly no moral arguments however valid they may be, that will move Israel as it's sitting on a pile of nukes and a political system that is pretty fucking crazy. They will continue to push the pallies away, the US will continue to support Israel for another couple of years, at least ten or twenty. And looking at the demographics in Israel I've come to understand they will have to forbid a sizeable portion of their own population from voting in order to deny the Arab segment any influence. God what a fucking mess. I feel truly sorry for all the nice people on both sides who have been caught in this clusterfuck.

I don't think the Israeli government can require their citizens to be Jewish in order to vote, at least not without exhausting what little goodwill they have left in Europe and North America. It can't be very much longer before they have a non-trivial number of Israeli Arab parliamentary candidates, to say nothing of the increasing voter bloc that's presumably less than pleased at the status quo.

[bobalot]

Another Israeli apologist cockgoblin denying the Palestinian papers are authentic.

Too bad Nabil Shaath, the former member of Palestinian negotiations team, admits documents published by al-Jazeera are real.

Israel was offered near 100% of everything they wanted (much of which they had no right to) and still refused. Fuck them.

[Kane Starkiller]

Let me put this as bluntly as I can; I don't want Israeli settlements in the West Bank anymore than you do. In an ideal world, there would be two states, and Jerusalem would be administered by a neutral third party. But this isn't an ideal world, and however much it may suck, we have to live in reality. And the reality is, the Palestinian authorities are incapable of controlling their own populace.

OK let's go with the idea that Palestinians are incapable of controlling their own populace so Israeli presence is required. What does that have to do with Israel setting up and expanding civilian settlements on Palestinian territory?
We can discuss how far Israeli should go to defend itself against terrorism but this has nothing to do with it. This thread is about Israeli ongoing COLONIZATION of the West Bank. Israel and its supporters always try to conflate the issue of Israeli security and Israeli colonization efforts in the West Bank and they are simply not one and the same.

[Bakustra]

Except that the Palestinian territories aren't part of Israel proper. Let me put this as bluntly as I can; I don't want Israeli settlements in the West Bank anymore than you do. In an ideal world, there would be two states, and Jerusalem would be administered by a neutral third party. But this isn't an ideal world, and however much it may suck, we have to live in reality. And the reality is, the Palestinian authorities are incapable of controlling their own populace. When that happens, let me know, and I'll be the first one to support their independence.

There is one thing that others didn't mention- one of the reasons that the Palestinian authorities can't "control their population" is that the Palestinian Authority is widely seen as a puppet of Israel, which these papers have essentially confirmed, while Israel has indicated it will overthrow by force any government which it does not like, as in Operation Cast Lead, which was also confirmed by the papers. In other words, you cannot really throw blame on the Palestinians, seeing as Israel does its best to keep them bantustans totally dependent on Israel through this and the other methods outlined by the other posters. When one state is clearly the oppressor, they get the lion's share of the blame for the violence- one cannot say that Palestinians wouldn't stop until they've killed everyone in Israel regardless of what Israel does because Israel has struck first every single time and has dominated Palestine. It's like, going back to apartheid, using necklacing or terrorist attacks by the ANC to state that they were morally equal with the South African government.

The Pallies are fucked. The ones in Gaza I guess can siphon into Egypt. The others, I don't know. At this point I can't see anything, certainly no moral arguments however valid they may be, that will move Israel as it's sitting on a pile of nukes and a political system that is pretty fucking crazy. They will continue to push the pallies away, the US will continue to support Israel for another couple of years, at least ten or twenty. And looking at the demographics in Israel I've come to understand they will have to forbid a sizeable portion of their own population from voting in order to deny the Arab segment any influence. God what a fucking mess. I feel truly sorry for all the nice people on both sides who have been caught in this clusterfuck.

The only thing that's really an impediment is US support. South Africa had a worse demographic situation, its own nuclear stockpile, and one-party rule for the whole of apartheid. US support is what keeps the whole rotten structure propped up, as US and UK support did for South Africa in the 1980s.

[cosmicalstorm]

The only thing that's really an impediment is US support. South Africa had a worse demographic situation, its own nuclear stockpile, and one-party rule for the whole of apartheid. US support is what keeps the whole rotten structure propped up, as US and UK support did for South Africa in the 1980s.

That's true and that's why I added my belief that US support for Israel will hold firm for at least ten or twenty years. I haven't seen any sign of this changing. Honestly I have to say that this never ending support seems so strange and counter productive to me that sometimes when people rave about zionist plots a small part of me kind of thinks "Well they are probably crazy, but...".

[eyl]

Except that the Palestinian territories aren't part of Israel proper. Let me put this as bluntly as I can; I don't want Israeli settlements in the West Bank anymore than you do. In an ideal world, there would be two states, and Jerusalem would be administered by a neutral third party. But this isn't an ideal world, and however much it may suck, we have to live in reality. And the reality is, the Palestinian authorities are incapable of controlling their own populace. When that happens, let me know, and I'll be the first one to support their independence.

There is one thing that others didn't mention- one of the reasons that the Palestinian authorities can't "control their population" is that the Palestinian Authority is widely seen as a puppet of Israel, which these papers have essentially confirmed, while Israel has indicated it will overthrow by force any government which it does not like, as in Operation Cast Lead, which was also confirmed by the papers. In other words, you cannot really throw blame on the Palestinians, seeing as Israel does its best to keep them bantustans totally dependent on Israel through this and the other methods outlined by the other posters. When one state is clearly the oppressor, they get the lion's share of the blame for the violence- one cannot say that Palestinians wouldn't stop until they've killed everyone in Israel regardless of what Israel does because Israel has struck first every single time and has dominated Palestine. It's like, going back to apartheid, using necklacing or terrorist attacks by the ANC to state that they were morally equal with the South African government.

How do you figure? Israel wasn't exactly happy with Arafat's government either, but it didn't use force against it until the intifada started - where the violence was, let me remind you, initiated by the Palestinians. The hostility towards the Hamas government was simply because for all intents and purposes Hamas was already at war with Israel - presenting it as "Israel attacking a government it didn't like", is a considerable oversimplification at the very least, under the circumstances.

that's how this shit started if you actually cared to remember when the largely Ashkenazim and the Sephardim pretty much stole fifty percent of the land despite being 33% of the population

Your figures ignore A) the issue of land quality (half of that 50% was desert) and B) assume the population allocated to the Jewish state was 100% Jewish, which wasn't the case.

[Bakustra]

How do you figure? Israel wasn't exactly happy with Arafat's government either, but it didn't use force against it until the intifada started - where the violence was, let me remind you, initiated by the Palestinians. The hostility towards the Hamas government was simply because for all intents and purposes Hamas was already at war with Israel - presenting it as "Israel attacking a government it didn't like", is a considerable oversimplification at the very least, under the circumstances.

The papers have indicated that Operation Cast Lead was punishment on the people of Gaza for electing Hamas. That is Israel overthrowing a democratically-elected government that it doesn't like, because it is opposed to them. That's functionally equivalent to the US deposing Allende, or invading Grenada. Not to mention that Hamas would be similarly justified in its use of violence, as the Likud coalition ruling in Israel has shown itself to be anti-Palestinian and has regularly encouraged the invasion and colonization of the West Bank by Israelis, and on a broader level every Israeli government has been resolutely anti-Arab. So talking about how Hamas is dedicated to the destruction of the Jewish state, while repulsive, sidesteps that the ruling Israeli parties are dedicated to the prevention of any Palestinian state or sovereignty. However, the difference is that Israel could invade and bombard and Palestine can only commit terrorist actions, which again makes it a case of power- and the disparity of power again destroys claims of moral equivalency.

[Ritterin Sophia]

Your figures ignore A) the issue of land quality (half of that 50% was desert)

Irrelevant. It was land that the majority had no claim to or a tenuous one at best.

and B) assume the population allocated to the Jewish state was 100% Jewish, which wasn't the case.

Your point? This isn't helping you any since we've already pointed out that the Israelis were given control of areas where they didn't even have a majority for no reasonable reason. I wouldn't leave my home that I'd lived in for decades just because some squatters tried to steal it. And for your information my numbers include only the Jewish population.

[Thanas]

People, let us not discuss things that happened in 47 etc. That would be violating the IvP moratorium.

[Ritterin Sophia]

Fair enough, like I said it was to point out that justifying acting badly because someone acted badly to you only continues the cycle since the other side can do the same.

[MKSheppard]

The papers have indicated that Operation Cast Lead was punishment on the people of Gaza for electing Hamas.

No actually, the papers indicate what the PLO (i'm sorry, Palestinian Authority) THINKS was the reason for Cast Lead.

The actual truth is that Cast Lead was designed to eliminate the danger of mortar/rocketspam out of Gaza into Israel -- you know, the 1967 Israel -- and it did that pretty damn well -- mortars/rockets fired into Israel from Gaza were reaching over a thousand -- maybe two thousand a year.

After Cast lead, those numbers dropped to like a couple dozen a year and have stayed relatively unchanging at a level that Israel can tolerate in the name of "peace".

[Bakustra]

The papers have indicated that Operation Cast Lead was punishment on the people of Gaza for electing Hamas.

No actually, the papers indicate what the PLO (i'm sorry, Palestinian Authority) THINKS was the reason for Cast Lead.

The actual truth is that Cast Lead was designed to eliminate the danger of mortar/rocketspam out of Gaza into Israel -- you know, the 1967 Israel -- and it did that pretty damn well -- mortars/rockets fired into Israel from Gaza were reaching over a thousand -- maybe two thousand a year.

After Cast lead, those numbers dropped to like a couple dozen a year and have stayed relatively unchanging at a level that Israel can tolerate in the name of "peace".

Prove it, buddy. Do you have some internal evidence from Israel which would contradict this? The extracts provided by Al-Jazeera, especially for this meeting, indicate that the official Israeli position, as presented by actual Israeli negotiators, was that they would not accept Hamas ruling in the Gaza strip, and so actually planned to invade, overthrow and retreat. In light of the UN report determining that the supposed attacks from hospitals and mosques the Israeli forces used to justify their destruction of said structures are unlikely to have happened, I think it quite plausible that the IDF had as a goal to damage Gaza as much as practical during their invasion. Your version requires that they have lied to the Palestinian Authority about their reasons for doing so, and so requires evidence.

But you're the same guy who pretends to base his opposition to Palestinian independence on a misconception, rather than reveal the actual reason.

[cosmicalstorm]

Is anyone else but me tired of debating the morals or the legal justification for Israels existence or actions? At this point they are where they are, they have made it clear they will try to grab as much more land as they can get away with, and they won't be moved by anything other than a nuclear war in the short term. Or some kind of demographic change, in the long term. My every impression of Israel is that they do not give two shits about any moral arguments, international law and so on.

[Aaron]

Is anyone else but me tired of debating the morals or the legal justification for Israels existence or actions? At this point they are where they are, they have made it clear they will try to grab as much more land as they can get away with, and they won't be moved by anything other than a nuclear war in the short term. Or some kind of demographic change, in the long term. My every impression of Israel is that they do not give two shits about any moral arguments, international law and so on.

No, I agree with you. That's why I don't bother to participate in these debates.

[Metahive]

Is anyone else but me tired of debating the morals or the legal justification for Israels existence or actions?

As long as the issue is an open, festering sore with consequences on a geopolitical scale it's an issue worth discussing. What I don't get is people posting on threads just to express their disinterest in the topic as if that's something equally as or more interesting than the matter at hand.

[Ritterin Sophia]

Is anyone else but me tired of debating the morals or the legal justification for Israels existence or actions?

Would you mind showing me where anyone advocated that we could or should dismantle Israel?

[bobalot]

Is anyone else but me tired of debating the morals or the legal justification for Israels existence or actions?

Would you mind showing me where anyone advocated that we could or should dismantle Israel?

It's telling that for many Israeli apologists, the advocating the dismantling of Jew-only settlements = advocating the end of Israel's existence.

[eyl]

Prove it, buddy. Do you have some internal evidence from Israel which would contradict this? The extracts provided by Al-Jazeera, especially for this meeting, indicate that the official Israeli position, as presented by actual Israeli negotiators, was that they would not accept Hamas ruling in the Gaza strip, and so actually planned to invade, overthrow and retreat.

Prove what? that the incidence of rocket attacks dropped after CL? Here

As for Hamas, AFAIK there isn't a public Israeli statement on the subject; but given that, again, Israel and Hamas are effectively at war, opposition to Hamas does not automatically mean Israel would depose any Palestinian regime it "didn't like"

In light of the UN report determining that the supposed attacks from hospitals and mosques the Israeli forces used to justify their destruction of said structures are unlikely to have happened, I think it quite plausible that the IDF had as a goal to damage Gaza as much as practical during their invasion. Your version requires that they have lied to the Palestinian Authority about their reasons for doing so, and so requires evidence.

Uh...AFAIR the Goldstone report concluded that mosques weren't used for attacks by examining the case of a single mosque and concluding that therefore it was unlikely any mosques were used in such a fashion; hardly sound methodology even if there wasn't (publicly disseminated at the time) video showing an attack launched from a mosque (which the report did not address).

It's telling that for many Israeli apologists, the advocating the dismantling of Jew-only settlements = advocating the end of Israel's existence

No, actually it's more of a bad reflex picked up because you can find, on most forums (including this one, IINM) threads discussing whether Israel is legitimate and/or should be dismantled.

[Zaune]

No, actually it's more of a bad reflex picked up because you can find, on most forums (including this one, IINM) threads discussing whether Israel is legitimate and/or should be dismantled.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but these are not unreasonable questions. I'm not especially enamoured with Hamas and I'm even less enamoured with the idea of military action against Israel, but do you have any better ideas?

[bobalot]

It's telling that for many Israeli apologists, the advocating the dismantling of Jew-only settlements = advocating the end of Israel's existence

No, actually it's more of a bad reflex picked up because you can find, on most forums (including this one, IINM) threads discussing whether Israel is legitimate and/or should be dismantled.

Fuck off, asshole. It's a hysterical claim that's trotted out every time there is the slightest criticism of Israel's settlements. Another talking point used to derail any criticism of settlements is Hama's attacks on Israel, as if Israel's illegal settlements and its security are somehow the same issue. It's dishonest and transparent, but it's in just about any thread about settlements where apologists attempt to justify settlement building.

[eyl]

It's telling that for many Israeli apologists, the advocating the dismantling of Jew-only settlements = advocating the end of Israel's existence

No, actually it's more of a bad reflex picked up because you can find, on most forums (including this one, IINM) threads discussing whether Israel is legitimate and/or should be dismantled.

Fuck off, asshole. It's a hysterical claim that's trotted out every time there is the slightest criticism of Israel's settlements. Another talking point used to derail any criticism of settlements is Hama's attacks on Israel, as if Israel's illegal settlements and its security are somehow the same issue. It's dishonest and transparent, but it's in just about any thread about settlements where apologists attempt to justify settlement building.

Go untwist your undies. I did say it was a bad reflex, didn't I? Yet the fact remains that dismantling Israel is occasionally trotted out as a viable solution to these issues, which makes some people...preemptively touchy, let us say, so at least to a degree I understand where those making those arguments (with which I disagree, if it wasn't clear enough) are coming from (in some cases, anyway).

[eyl]

No, actually it's more of a bad reflex picked up because you can find, on most forums (including this one, IINM) threads discussing whether Israel is legitimate and/or should be dismantled.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but these are not unreasonable questions. I'm not especially enamoured with Hamas and I'm even less enamoured with the idea of military action against Israel, but do you have any better ideas?

A better idea to do what? How is dismantling Israel a practical* solution to anything?

*Practical meaning that you don't get to simply posit Israel is dismantled.

[Thanas]

Let's all calm down a bit, people (not directed at anybody in particular).


[/mod hat off]

Eyl, the wikileaks cables show that Israel did not have the goal to attack Gaza to prevent Hamas from gaining ground, but predominantly had the objective of making life in the strip as miserable as possible. This is what the Israeli Government stated to US diplomats.

[eyl]

Eyl, the wikileaks cables show that Israel did not have the goal to attack Gaza to prevent Hamas from gaining ground, but predominantly had the objective of making life in the strip as miserable as possible. This is what the Israeli Government stated to US diplomats.

In which cable? The only one I've found (in an admittedly brief Google search) on the subject is this one, and at least as far as the article goes doesn't describe what you say. In any event, I never said that Israel was merely trying to contain Hamas - only that the Israeli response to a Hamas government would not necessarily apply to different government (making life miserable in the Strip would still be a response to the existence of a Hamas government), even if it was one Israel did not approve of.