[DoctorNick]

The obvious solution is for Israel to cease to exist, as its existence is built on the oppression of the native peoples of the land.

[commanderkai]

DoctorNick wrote:

The obvious solution is for Israel to cease to exist, as its existence is built on the oppression of the native peoples of the land.

Mm...stupidity at 8:42 AM. Its like a fresh cup of coffee, except it leaves a really bad aftertaste.

[commanderkai]

Zipperfish wrote:

As stated, time will tell if this incursion successfully eliminates Hamas as a terrorist force. I have my doubts. Somehow, I think I'll be picking up the paper this time next year or the year after and re-reading a different iteration of this same story. I could be wrong.

Hezbollah is still active in Lebanon. I doubt we've heard the last of them.

Well, this all depends on Israel's goals. It can either destroy it as a terrorist organization, or as a threat to Israel. Hezbollah, at least for the past two years, has not been a true threat to Israel, in the sense that it hasn't lobbed rockets on a daily basis. Not having a mind reading machine of the Israeli military brass, I do not know if they want it destroyed completely (sounds better on TV) or just contained enough to make it a Palestinian problem, and possibly allowing Fatah to move in again.

[DoctorNick]

commanderkai wrote:

DoctorNick wrote:

The obvious solution is for Israel to cease to exist, as its existence is built on the oppression of the native peoples of the land.

Mm...stupidity at 8:42 AM. Its like a fresh cup of coffee, except it leaves a really bad aftertaste.

So you don't think that Israel is founded on land taken from the Muslims who originally lived there? You don't think Israel an elected theocracy who treats the people who aren't members of the state religion, the Muslims who originally lived there, as second-class citizens? Forces people from the land that is supposed to be allotted to them? Blockades their territory so that humanitarian aid, food and water cannot come through, reducing the standard of life there to "survival" levels? Bombs the shit out of them every now and then to assert their dominance?

[commanderkai]

DoctorNick wrote:

So you don't think that Israel is founded on land taken from the Muslims who originally lived there?

Not really, considering the history of the major purchases of land by Jews since maybe the 1880s, and the fact that many of the Arab militias told the civilian populations to leave.

Quote:

You don't think Israel an elected theocracy who treats the people who aren't members of the state religion, the Muslims who originally lived there, as second-class citizens?

Um, no, since about 20% of Israel is Arab, and probably either a part of the Christian or Muslim minority in the nation, and they are not treated as second class citizens.

Also, calling an elected government a theocracy is basically being ignorant.

Quote:

Forces people from the land that is supposed to be allotted to them?

Forced who out of what land? A majority of the people who left were told to left by the Arabs in 1948, but those same militias didn't imagine losing.

Quote:

Blockades their territory so that humanitarian aid, food and water cannot come through, reducing the standard of life there to "survival" levels?

Since when did any nation need to keep its borders open to its neighbors? Is that a new guideline? Be friendly to hostile neighbors? Since when did Israel need to provide humanitarian aid to their self-declared (by Hamas) enemy.

A better question for you, why does Egypt not open its border to Gaza?

Quote:

Bombs the shit out of them every now and then to assert their dominance?

By now and then...is that when Israel loses its patience after their civilian population is in constant fear of rocket attacks by Hamas, and 2 years ago, Hezbollah.

My patience would of ended when the truce ended, June 24, 2008, when the first wave of rockets crossed from Gaza into Israel.

[DerbyX]

Thats a one-sided viewpoint. Here's another:

Quote:

In the late 1800s a group in Europe decided to colonize this land. Known as Zionists, this group consisted of an extremist minority of the Jewish population. They wanted to create a Jewish homeland, and considered locations in Africa and the Americas, before settling on Palestine.

At first, this immigration created no problems. However, as more and more Zionists immigrated to Palestine – many with the express wish of taking over the land for a Jewish state – the indigenous population became increasingly alarmed. Eventually, fighting broke out, with escalating waves of violence. Hitler’s rise to power and Nazi atrocities, combined with Zionist activities to sabotage efforts to place Jewish refugees in western countries, led to increased Jewish immigration to Palestine, and conflict grew.

1947-1949 War

While it is widely and correctly reported that the resulting war eventually included five Arab armies, less well known is the fact that throughout this war Zionist forces outnumbered all Arab and Palestinian combatants combined – often by a factor of two to three. Also contrary to popular belief, Arab armies did not invade Israel – virtually all battles were fought on land that was to have been the Palestinian state.

Finally, it is significant to note that Arab armies entered the conflict only after Zionist forces had committed 16 massacres, including the grisly massacre of over 100 men, women, and children at Deir Yassin. Future Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin, head of one of the Jewish terrorist groups, called this a “splendid act of conquest,” and stated: “As in Deir Yassin, so everywhere, we will attack and smite the enemy. God, God, Thou has chosen us for conquest.” Zionist/Israeli forces committed 33 massacres altogether.

By the end of the war, Israel had conquered 78 percent of Palestine; three-quarters of a million Palestinians had been made refugees; over 500 towns and villages had been destroyed; and a new map was drawn up, in which every city, river and hillock received a new, Hebrew name, as all vestiges of the Palestinian culture were to be erased. For many decades Israel denied the existence of this population, former Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir once saying: “There is no such thing as a Palestinian.”

There are two primary issues at the core of this continuing conflict. First, there is the inevitably destabilizing effect of trying to maintain an ethnically preferential state, particularly when it is largely of foreign origin – the original population of what is now Israel was 96 percent Muslim and Christian. Yet, Muslim and Christian refugees are prohibited from returning to their homes in the self-described Jewish state. (And those within Israel are subjected to systematic discrimination.)

Second, Israel’s continued military occupation and confiscation of privately owned land in the West Bank, and control over Gaza, are being resisted by Palestinian inhabitants. It is these occupied territories that, according to the Oslo peace accords of 1993, were going to become a Palestinian state. However, when Israel continued to confiscate land in these areas and to move its citizens onto it, the Palestinian population rebelled. (The Barak offer, widely reputed to be generous, was anything but.) This uprising, called the “Intifada” (Arabic for “shaking off”) began in the fall of 2000.

or

Quote:

The forced displacement of a people

The U.N. vote led to celebration among the Zionists, the settler movement working to create an exclusively Jewish state in Palestine. Despite owning just six percent of the land, Resolution 181 awarded them 56 percent of Palestine. On the Palestinian side, there was anger and rebellion. As all parties knew ahead of time, partition meant war.

Fighting broke out immediately.

In January 1948, the better-armed Zionist military forces began to carry out “Plan Dalet.” The point of the plan was to terrorize and drive out the Palestinian population. Before Plan Dalet, Palestinian villagers left their homes during battles, but typically went only as far as the next village.

On April 9, 1948, a Zionist paramilitary organization, the Irgun, massacred the entire village of Deir Yassin, raising “Plan Dalet” to a new level of brutality. When the dust had cleared, more than 200 Palestinian children, women and men lay dead. The massacre was meant as a warning to all Palestinians.

While the Jewish Agency formally “condemned” the Deir Yassin massacre, on the same day it incorporated the Irgun paramilitary into the official military Joint Command.

Twelve days after Deir Yassin, Zionist forces launched a lethal attack on the Palestinian areas of the mixed city of Haifa. They rolled barrel bombs filled with gasoline and dynamite down narrow alleys in the heavily populated city while mortar shells pounded the Arab neighborhoods from overhead. Nearly the entire Arab population fled.

Within a week, similar tactics led 77,000 of 80,000 Palestinians to flee the port city of Jaffa.

By May 15, 1948, when Israel’s independence was proclaimed, 300,000 Palestinians were living and dying in abominable conditions of exile in Lebanon, Gaza, Syria and the Jordan Valley. By the end of that year, the number of dispossessed Palestinians had grown to 750,000.

In the 1948 war, Israel, with its superior economic and military resources and support from the Western powers, conquered 78 percent of Palestine. The Israeli military strategy was to not only conquer land, but also to drive out as much of the Palestinian population as possible from that land.

Nearly 80 percent of the Arab population was forcibly “transferred” to make way for the new Israeli state. Their farms, workplaces and homes were stolen, forming an indispensable foundation for the new Israeli economy and state.

In the 1967 “Six-Day War,” Israel seized the remainder of historic Palestine: the West Bank and Gaza. This created 300,000 more refugees, many of whom were second-time exiles, having already fled the Israelis 19 years earlier.

None of those driven out in 1948 and 1967, nor their descendants, now numbering more than six million, have ever been allowed to come back or been compensated for their loss. This injustice remains despite U.N. Resolution 194, passed in December 1948, stating unequivocally that all refugees must be allowed to return and have their homes, lands and other property restored to them. The U.S. and Israeli governments have ignored the U.N. resolution for more than half a century.

While forcibly preventing the return of any exiled Palestinians, the new Israeli state proclaimed that any person living anywhere in the world who had proof of one Jewish grandparent, regardless of whether they or their family ever stepped foot in the Middle East, had the “right of return” to Israel. Those “returning” would be granted immediately citizenship in the new exclusivist state.

Right of return remains key demand

Six decades after Al-Nakba, the right of return remains a key issue despite the Israeli and U.S. leaders’ constant efforts to dismiss it.

It is obvious why the cause remains so vital for Palestinians. If a people are deprived of their land, their very existence as a people is threatened. Defending the right of return is a key element in the struggle to maintain the unity of the Palestinian people between those who remain inside historic Palestine and those families that have been illegally expelled.

Israeli opposition to Palestinian return is not really because there is “no room” for the Palestinians in Palestine, as Zionist ideologues often claim. That argument is blatantly racist. Palestinian demographer Dr. Salman Abu-Sitta has pointed out that most of the more than 500 demolished Palestinian towns and villages remain unoccupied today. They were destroyed and their residents driven away for mainly political purposes—the creation of an exclusivist state.

Nor is this some long-resolved issue buried in the sands of time. Hundreds of thousands of people forcibly exiled in 1948 and 1967 are alive today. Many hold among their dearest possessions the keys to their homes in Palestine. Some of those houses, particularly in the demolished villages, were bulldozed into the ground. Many others, however, especially in cities like Haifa, Jaffa, Jerusalem and elsewhere were expropriated and turned over to Israeli settlers, who live in them to this day.

Today, 46 percent of the six million Palestinian refugees reside inside historic Palestine, the 1948 borders of Israel, or the West Bank and Gaza. Another 42 percent live within 100 miles of its borders, in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria. (Roane Carey, ed., The New Intifada, Versa, 2001)Put another way, nearly nine out of 10 Palestinian refugees could be home in the time in takes many people in this country to commute to work.

Hundreds of thousands of Palestinian families live in extreme poverty in 59 refugee camps, with no prospect of a better future. For them, the right of return is not abstract or academic, but an issue that speaks to their very survival. The situation is especially dire in the camps of Lebanon and Gaza, which are home to more than one million people.

The return of the exiled Palestinians would not mean, as is commonly claimed by the supporters of Israel, that the Jewish population would be forced to leave.

But it would mean that Israel could not continue as an apartheid-style state, with special rights for one group, serving the interests of imperialism in a key strategic region of the world.

This goes to the heart of why Israeli and U.S. ruling circles so adamantly oppose the Palestinian right of return. It also speaks to the need for all people who stand for justice and self-determination to defend the right of return as a fundamental democratic right.

If I had been treated like the Palestinians were I'd fight back too and so would every single person on this forum who think that all Israel is doing is fighting back.

[commanderkai]

Derby, both sides committed massacres against both Jews and Arabs. Refugees were created from Arab Jews fleeing neighboring nations. Also, the Arab armies had better equipment, and British military officers leading them. Also, very few nations in 1948 even bothered selling weapons, one in particular was Czechoslovakia, probably due to the fact few nations even thought Israel would last the night.

But of course, where are the links you got that rather...interesting views on 1948

[DerbyX]

I'm not just talking about the whole "chicken and egg" massacre thing where one side claims revenge for something the other side does.

The fact is that despite claims that the land was bought it was still taken away from Palestinians who lost out in the end. You can't just buy a lot of land in our country then declare it a new country or else the US would have bought us long ago.

The truth us that so few people cared for the people living in that region that they simply disregarded them entirely over the last century as Europe pushed its Jewish populations out. Note: I'm not talking about the holocaust in this way because the various oppression reasons Jews left England or France were established long before that.

My links are the opposite side of the propaganda you post. As I said, here is the other side of the story.

[gadial]

It's interesting that the quotes talk about "Eventually, fighting broke out, with escalating waves of violence" and "Fighting broke out immediately" and fail to mention WHO started fighting (hint: not the evil land-taking Zionists).

In short - the Zionists did not intend to throw the Arab population out. The Arab population tried to push the Jewish population out - into the sea. The Jewish population fought them, and won. Quite amazingly, not all the Arab population were expelled; can you imagine a Jewish population living in, say, Gaza without the IDF's protection?

Nope. The "evil Zionists are coming to drive me out" scenario is false. Try "the evil Zionists are trying to build a country which upholds different values then the ones I believe in, so I should kill them" - it's closer to reality.

[DerbyX]

Try "They are taking our land". Your scenario is entirely why you don't understand why their is still conflict. You won't acknowledge the root causes and place any blame on anybody but the Arabs and/or Palestinians.

[commanderkai]

DerbyX wrote:

I'm not just talking about the whole "chicken and egg" massacre thing where one side claims revenge for something the other side does.

I'm not either. Both sides committed massacres. The difference is, Palestinian militias stated that they should leave their homes, because they were going to get them back after they crushed the Jews. They didn't crush the Jews, and they aren't going to get their homes back. Did some lose their homes forcibly? Sure, but both sides had that issue as well.

Quote:

The fact is that despite claims that the land was bought it was still taken away from Palestinians who lost out in the end. You can't just buy a lot of land in our country then declare it a new country or else the US would have bought us long ago.

The fact is, before 1949, Zionists purchased large parts of land from the Palestinians. This led to large portions of the land that are claimed to be Palestinian homes, actually being Jewish land before the UN declaration. This shows that the Palestinians were not the only population there.

Also, Canadian law, compared to laws at that time, are much different. The government can seize property through eminent domain in both Canada and the United States. Of course, corporations would sue like crazy.

Quote:

The truth us that so few people cared for the people living in that region that they simply disregarded them entirely over the last century as Europe pushed its Jewish populations out. Note: I'm not talking about the holocaust in this way because the various oppression reasons Jews left England or France were established long before that.

Very true, thus why they wanted independence from their British overlords after the war. The King David hotel bombing, anyone?

Quote:

My links are the opposite side of the propaganda you post. As I said, here is the other side of the story.

You didn't post links. You posted excerpts. There's a difference. You copied and pasted those without links, which usually means you're crediting them to your own work.

[HyperionTheEvil]

gadial wrote:

Zipperfish, I believe you are twice mistaken.

First of all, you suppose that the purpose of the Hamas firing rockets is to kill civilians. This is wrong, and quite obvious to anyone living in Israel. The real purpose is not killing (although some killings are necessary for it to work) but to make the lives of the Israeli citizens a living hell. Imagine living in a town where rockets fall on you every day. Image growing in such a town. For some people is Israel, this was the everyday situation for the last few years (and yes, this is the situation now for the people of Gaza , I'm afraid).

One of the things I've noticed about this war is that everyone has a "death count" - since "not enough" Israeli citizens are killed by the rockets, Israel has "no right" to retaliate. No one counts the people that stay alive but are scared shitless.

So the Hamas knows exactly what he's doing when he's firing rockets, and he's not doing it wrong. A larger death toll would have caused a major operation much sooner (like the operation that went on in the west bank after an extremely bloody month in 2002), so they tried to keep the flames relatively down. By launching a massive attack against them, Israel have changed the rules.

Which leads us to the second point where I disagree with you. Israel had never tried to crush the Hamas like it is trying now. There was never an offensive of this scale on the Hamas (NOT on civilians; Israel does not intentionally target civilians, otherwise the death toll would have been thousands already), and it was never so obvious that Israel's intention is to disintegrate it. Sure, they might fail, but it's not a lesson learned from the past that they're bound to fail; and I'm not sure if this offensive won't indeed "change the rules" in such a way that the remnants of the Hamas would be more willing to go for a "political solution". Up until this war, it was obvious that they're not.

Frankly i have no use for either Israel or the Palestinians, you're both a pain in the ass.

You both claim to be the good guys and for decades now happliy going on slaughtering each other and then point the blame finger somwhere else. Israel and the Palestinians say they want a 'solution' but only on their own defitnion of the term .Every few years the two of you will head off to Oslo or Camp David and then the whole cycle begins again.

I don't see why the west should be interested in dealing with either of you. You inflame the region and bring blowback to the west. It's a middle east problem, let the middle east countries, syria Egypt, jordan, Israel etc etc sort it out.

[Zipperfish]

commanderkai wrote:

Zipperfish wrote:

As stated, time will tell if this incursion successfully eliminates Hamas as a terrorist force. I have my doubts. Somehow, I think I'll be picking up the paper this time next year or the year after and re-reading a different iteration of this same story. I could be wrong.

Hezbollah is still active in Lebanon. I doubt we've heard the last of them.

Well, this all depends on Israel's goals. It can either destroy it as a terrorist organization, or as a threat to Israel. Hezbollah, at least for the past two years, has not been a true threat to Israel, in the sense that it hasn't lobbed rockets on a daily basis. Not having a mind reading machine of the Israeli military brass, I do not know if they want it destroyed completely (sounds better on TV) or just contained enough to make it a Palestinian problem, and possibly allowing Fatah to move in again.

Good points. I'd counter that it is difficult to destroy a terrorist organization because it isn't much of an organization to begin with. Terrorism is a form of asymmterical warfare precisely because so little organization or equipment is needed. For the side with the superior military, I imagine it's kind of like trying to kill ants with a machine gun. I think the best that Israel can manage is to destabilize Hamas for a while and earn them a respite in attacks.
Unfortuantely, by doing so, they inflict a lot of civilian casualites and further impoverish the Palestinian people, prehaps giving way to a new generation of Hamas acolytes.

And the band played on.

[Zipperfish]

HyperionTheEvil wrote:

gadial wrote:

Zipperfish, I believe you are twice mistaken.

First of all, you suppose that the purpose of the Hamas firing rockets is to kill civilians. This is wrong, and quite obvious to anyone living in Israel. The real purpose is not killing (although some killings are necessary for it to work) but to make the lives of the Israeli citizens a living hell. Imagine living in a town where rockets fall on you every day. Image growing in such a town. For some people is Israel, this was the everyday situation for the last few years (and yes, this is the situation now for the people of Gaza , I'm afraid).

One of the things I've noticed about this war is that everyone has a "death count" - since "not enough" Israeli citizens are killed by the rockets, Israel has "no right" to retaliate. No one counts the people that stay alive but are scared shitless.

So the Hamas knows exactly what he's doing when he's firing rockets, and he's not doing it wrong. A larger death toll would have caused a major operation much sooner (like the operation that went on in the west bank after an extremely bloody month in 2002), so they tried to keep the flames relatively down. By launching a massive attack against them, Israel have changed the rules.

Which leads us to the second point where I disagree with you. Israel had never tried to crush the Hamas like it is trying now. There was never an offensive of this scale on the Hamas (NOT on civilians; Israel does not intentionally target civilians, otherwise the death toll would have been thousands already), and it was never so obvious that Israel's intention is to disintegrate it. Sure, they might fail, but it's not a lesson learned from the past that they're bound to fail; and I'm not sure if this offensive won't indeed "change the rules" in such a way that the remnants of the Hamas would be more willing to go for a "political solution". Up until this war, it was obvious that they're not.

Frankly i have no use for either Israel or the Palestinians, you're both a pain in the ass.

You both claim to be the good guys and for decades now happliy going on slaughtering each other and then point the blame finger somwhere else. Israel and the Palestinians say they want a 'solution' but only on their own defitnion of the term .Every few years the two of you will head off to Oslo or Camp David and then the whole cycle begins again.

I don't see why the west should be interested in dealing with either of you. You inflame the region and bring blowback to the west. It's a middle east problem, let the middle east countries, syria Egypt, jordan, Israel etc etc sort it out.

It's interesting because I see a lot of moral "donor fatigue," if you will, this time round. I see more people than I have in the past, on both the left and the right, making similar comments.

[DerbyX]

commanderkai wrote:

I'm not either. Both sides committed massacres. The difference is, Palestinian militias stated that they should leave their homes, because they were going to get them back after they crushed the Jews. They didn't crush the Jews, and they aren't going to get their homes back. Did some lose their homes forcibly? Sure, but both sides had that issue as well.

No, you just think that.

Quote:

Palestinian refugees
See also: Palestinian Right of Return, Palestinian refugee, 1948 Palestinian exodus, and 1967 Palestinian exodus
The number of Palestinians who fled or were expelled from Israel following its creation was estimated at 711,000 in 1949[42] Because the UN definition of Palestinian refugees includes all the descendants of refugees, the number of refugees now stands at around four million.[43] Most of these people were born outside of Israel, nevertheless they claim Right of Return to Israel. Palestinian negotiators, most notably Yasser Arafat,[44] have so far insisted that refugees have a right to return to the places where they lived before 1948 and 1967, including those within the 1949 Armistice lines, citing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and UN General Assembly Resolution 194 as evidence.
The Arab Peace Initiative of 2002 declared that it proposed the compromise of a "just resolution" of the refugee problem.[45] Palestinian and international authors have justified the right of return of the Palestinian refugees on several grounds:[46][47][48]
Several authors included in the broader New Historians assert that the Palestinian refugees were chased out or expelled by the actions of the Haganah, Lehi and Irgun.[49]
The traditional Israeli point of view arguing that Arab leaders encouraged Palestinian Arabs to flee has also been disputed by the New Historians, which instead have shown evidence indicating Arab leaders' will for the Palestinian Arab population to stay put.[50]
The Israeli Law of Return that grants citizenship to any Jew from anywhere in the world is viewed by some as discrimination towards non-Jews and especially to Palestinians that cannot apply for such citizenship nor return to the territory from which they were displaced or left.[51][52][53][54]
The strongest legal basis on the issue is UN Resolution 194, adopted in 1948. It states that, "the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible." UN Resolution 3236 "reaffirms also the inalienable right of the Palestinians to return to their homes and property from which they have been displaced and uprooted, and calls for their return". Resolution 242 from the UN affirms the necessity for "achieving a just settlement of the refugee problem," however, Resolution 242 does not specify that the "just settlement" must or should be in the form of a literal Palestinian right of return.

commanderkai wrote:

The fact is, before 1949, Zionists purchased large parts of land from the Palestinians. This led to large portions of the land that are claimed to be Palestinian homes, actually being Jewish land before the UN declaration. This shows that the Palestinians were not the only population there.

Purchased like NY was purchased? Buying land doesn't imply they knew, understood, or supported the establishment of a Jewish state on their land.

commanderkai wrote:

, Canadian law, compared to laws at that time, are much different. The government can seize property through eminent domain in both Canada and the United States. Of course, corporations would sue like crazy.

So what? The bottom line is that the land was stolen from people who by and large probably had no true understanding of what was going on and what was going to happen.

commanderkai wrote:

You didn't post links. You posted excerpts. There's a difference. You copied and pasted those without links, which usually means you're crediting them to your own work.

You haven't posted any links either though you will know. You have just been posting your opinion concerning various aspects of the conflict.

If you insist though. bare in mind I also said this is the other side of the propaganda coin.

As I have said before, I favour going in to help out both side with the eventual goal of 2 independent states. I have little sympathy for an Israel that is often the aggressor despite your claims otherwise and an Israel that persists in the illegal settlements, a source of a good deal of criticism against them.