View on the recent Gaza/Israel stikes

[piercehawkeye45]

Fall apart both politically and economically. Hamas runs Gaza, Fatah runs West Bank. They both want to a unified Palestine but only if they are the ones running it. A peace with Israel cannot be obtained without a unified Palestine and Israel knows that, hence why it has been using divide and conquer techniques since the PLO.

An independent Palestine would not be able to survive economically on its own either, especially without political stability and any resources. What resources do Palestinians have?

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

You do realize that Europeans invented the idea of the state, correct?

You are referring to the state of Israel, yes?

Prior to the state of Israel being formed, the people living in the area (Persians, Arabs, Jews, et al), always had absentee landlords. Probably because nobody in their right mind wanted to live in the shithole.

After Israel was formed and the Jews flocked in to make the desert flourish, it was not the locals but outside agitators that started the trouble. The Arabs, after losing a couple of wars, pretty much accepted the status quo, but the Persians continue to cause trouble.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

What resources do Palestinians have?

The west has poured billions into Palistine... they bought guns with it. If they would knock this shit off, there are plenty of countries, including Israel, that would take care of them.

[piercehawkeye45]

I was referring to the idea of a state in general? Notice how no one had political boundaries until European colonization?

But anyways, the British and Jews were first to attack. The Arab riots were reactionary to those.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Legion

Palestine was part of the Ottoman Empire and the British conquered it so a Jewish state could be formed.

The Jewish Legion, a group of battalions composed primarily of Zionist volunteers, assisted in the British conquest of Palestine. Arab opposition to the plan led to the 1920 Palestine riots and the formation of the Jewish organization known as the Haganah (meaning "The Defense" in Hebrew), from which the Irgun and Lehi split off.

n 1922, the League of Nations granted the United Kingdom a mandate over Palestine for the express purpose of "placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home".[45] The population of the area at this time was predominantly Muslim Arab, while the largest urban area in the region, Jerusalem, was predominantly Jewish.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel

As I've said many times, both sides contributed.

[Undertoad]

Before Hamas' election, and after the removal of settlements, 750 trucks went from Israel to Gaza every day, carrying food and goods and supplies.

A peace with Israel cannot be obtained without a unified Palestine and Israel knows that, hence why it has been using divide and conquer techniques since the PLO.

Oh this is the new excuse? Do keep us up to date. It's hard to keep up with the excuses for terrorist violence. Before this one it was the settlements. Those sneaky Joos always find some way to trick various Palestinian groups into being violently unstable.

and the British conquered it so a Jewish state could be formed

And then the terrible UN was tricked by the Zionist British into the partition plan, huh? With unstable, un-unified borders in wildly varied areas, so that the Arabs would go to war on the first day afterwards?

[piercehawkeye45]

When did I say that Israel was the sole factor behind it? I said what I've been emphasizing this entire time, BOTH SIDES HAVE FAULTS BEHIND IT.

http://www.crisisgroup.org/library/d...ne_divided.pdf

This, a very legitimate sources, clearly states that Israel is working with Fatah. Why wouldn't they? They view Hamas as a group that needs to be destroyed. But before that, it was Fatah that needs to be destroyed? How do you think they did that? How about when the PLO was in control?

You are a smart man UT, think about it for a second. Israel would prefer as much land as possible, why wouldn't they do this?

[Undertoad]

The 1947 UN Partition Plan. Who divided the borders again?

Israel would prefer as much land as possible to properly defend itself

FTFY.

Because land grab is the OLD excuse. It's last decade's criticism of Israel, and some people are still using it in knee-jerk fashion.

But it's very very very obviously not true at this time in history. Because Israel LEFT Gaza. It uprooted the homes and lives of Israelis who had lived there for twenty years to do so.

And suddenly, once that was no longer an excuse, new excuses arrive.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

I was referring to the idea of a state in general? Notice how no one had political boundaries until European colonization?

Right, before the idea of political boundaries was established, it was always military boundries... world wide, what ever you could capture and hold. That's why the residents of that area never owned it.

Palestine was part of the Ottoman Empire and the British conquered it so a Jewish state could be formed.

No, the Brits grabbed it to secure the Suez Canal so the tea supply was assured. The Jews took advantage of the opportunity to go home.

As I've said many times, both sides contributed.

Absolutely, there have transgressions by all, but the Palestinians have to face up to the fact that Israel is a reality and isn't going away. The rest of the world has accepted that, even if they are not happy about it. Even the Persians know that, but keep stirring up shit anyway.

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

And suddenly, once that was no longer an excuse, new excuses arrive.

Either way, that doesn't prove that Israel is working towards a solution. A disunified Palestine cannot make peace with Israel and neither Israel, Hamas, or Fatah are working towards a unified Palestine. In fact, most outside sources are not supporting a unified Palestine either. Which backs up my original point that all parties are at fault. Actually fault is a bad word because most actions by every side are defensive in nature.

Note, I am not saying Israel is solely at fault.

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Right, before the idea of political boundaries was established, it was always military boundries... world wide, what ever you could capture and hold. That's why the residents of that area never owned it.

Owned it in what respect? The residents of that land were born, lived, worked, and died on that land. Other people would come tax them for using land they conquered but it usually was still worked on by the same people.

This argument is literally no different than the Eddie Izzard standup on flags. Political boundries were not used by anyone outside Europe, therefore technically they did not own the land according to the Europeans. So, when Europeans colonized the area and set up politically boundaries, they got to determine who owned what land.

Doesn't that logic seem kind of messed up? Well actually it doesn't because the people with the guns make the rules but eitherway...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEx5G-GOS1k

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

The Jews took advantage of the opportunity to go home.

I've always wondered what made this land the Jews home and not anyone elses? They weren't the first people to live there, people have been living in that area for 10,000 years and Judaism is only around 3,000 years old. The area became Christian under 2,000 years ago and then Islamic about 1,200 years ago. It wasn't as if the Jews living there were kicked out either by the Christians, many converted and then converted to Islam. So technically, the Palestinians living there have been living there the entire time. The Jews living there now immigrated from other areas and do not have genetic origin to that land.

Or another view, why do Europeans have a right over the United States and Canada and not the natives? The natives were living there for over 10,000 years but we kicked and moved them around. Would the descendants of an Iroquois tribe be legitimate in "going home" and taking over New York?

The only way to make it much easier for everyone and not be hypocritical is to not give any group a right to any land. Jews do not get Israel and neither do Arabs. Nothing can be done to change the situation we are in so we have to deal with it.

If you disagree, show how Jews have a right to that land over any other group.

Absolutely, there have transgressions by all, but the Palestinians have to face up to the fact that Israel is a reality and isn't going away. The rest of the world has accepted that, even if they are not happy about it. Even the Persians know that, but keep stirring up shit anyway.

No, I agree as well. Hell, most Arab states accept it as well even though they may not show it. A small group of Palestinians are the only ones that do not, but they have got power through other means. Reread the original article I posted, it clearly says that the citizens of Gaza support Hamas not necessarily because of their views but because of the siege against them.

Now, I am not arguing that the siege is an ugly oppressive move. Israel is doing it to get rid of Hamas. And Hamas was elected because of Israeli actions. Those Israeli actions were reactionary to Palestinian actions which were reactions to Israeli which were reaction to...

Both sides are on the defensive and all three internal forces are doing what every other country in this world is doing, working to further their self interests. As I said, a peace cannot come without a unified Palestine and neither of the three sides, plus external forces, are working towards that.

[Undertoad]

Either way, that doesn't prove that Israel is working towards a solution.

Really? Uprooting citizens from their lives and homes of 20 years? Patiently waiting to see if the enemy runs out of bombs? You would do less I assure you.

They do what they can. They can't possibly address the real root of the problem that has developed. I think I get it:

The real root of the problem is that Israel is massively successful.

This presents a severe headache not for Palestine, but for all fanatical Islamists.

Israel's remarkable success is evidence, right before their eyes, that their very system of beliefs is faulty. Allah promised all that success to THEM. To see their deepest enemies succeed, economically, culturally, militarily, over and over again, is not just a source of envy. It creates an inner dialogue that is simply impossible for them to resolve in any sort of logical way.

This leads them to fund and support the proxy war so that the question doesn't have to be resolved... the battle is ongoing you see. Question is still in the air. Israel has won? Oh ho, not quite yet! Not in 1948, 1956, 1967, 1973... those were silly little struggles that didn't mean anything! The longer battle continues as long as mothers send their children to be suicide bombers.

Other cultures, following wars with their bitter enemies, including those in which they've lost their dear dear homeland, have picked themselves up and gotten on with it. We lost, there's nothing left we can do. Let's just move to the mountains. Why not this culture?

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Really? Uprooting citizens from their lives and homes of 20 years? Patiently waiting to see if the enemy runs out of bombs? You would do less I assure you.

They did the same to the Palestinians in 1948. But remember, even if the views of Israelis changed, it still doesn't undo that fact, no matter if they were justified in it or not. Which goes into this...

They can't possibly address the real root of the problem that has developed.

This is true. Israel cannot solve the problem. No single party can solve this problem. And saying the Palestinians can is not an answer. Very informed sources say that this problem cannot be solved without outside help. I already gave the link.

The real root of the problem is that Israel is massively successful.

Oh c'mon UT. You don't actually believe there is a single root to this problem. I mean, displacement, occupation, and a mutual hatred that has been around for over 1,000 years could not have any impact on this at all....

Honestly, I actually agree with you on what you said but that isn't the entirety of the movement. There are many other people with many other reasons. To say that everyone that is anti-Israel is doing it because of the reasons you gave is the same as saying anyone pro-Israel believes that God gave Israel to the Jews and the Jews have the right to take back that land by any means necessary, which does have a following as well.

[Undertoad]

Well stated. But why is this displaced culture different? Even the majority of Israelis today are displaced Jews and progeny thereof, that headed to Israel because they were kicked out of the various Arabic countries that had been their ancestral homes.

[piercehawkeye45]

I try not to jump to solutions based on ideals, but the situation at hand. Ideally, the Palestinians are no different than any other displaced group in history, which there have been a tremendous amount. The natives in the United States are displaced and face third world living conditions, many times without electricity and water but no one besides a few native radicals argue for a native state. If I did base solutions on ideals, I would naturally have to argue for a similar solution by every displaced group which you can quickly realize is unrealistic.

The reason why the Palestinian situation is different than the natives in the United States is because of the situation at hand. Look at how the relations between Israel and Palestine have changed over the past 20 years and compare that to native versus colonist relations in other countries such as Australia and the United States. The difference is that Palestinians fight back and have much larger numbers.

If you honestly look at it, the oppression and conditions other natives are in are not that much different than the Palestinians. If the Palestinians did not fight back and had smaller numbers they would just become the same as the natives in the United States or Aboriginals in Australia.

I do not disagree with the Jews on becoming self-empowering. Actually, it is quite possibly the best example in history. It is just that the location that they picked was one that could never work out. If a different location was picked and a secular, not Jewish state, was formed or converted, we would not see a problem or it at least would be much smaller.

Knowing that, we can see why the situation in Palestine is different than with any other displaced culture that we give attention too and also why a different solution is necessary. Unfortunately, with the situation at hand, a peace between Israel and Palestine is not likely because of many different factors that are both internal and external.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

Owned it in what respect? The residents of that land were born, lived, worked, and died on that land. Other people would come tax them for using land they conquered but it usually was still worked on by the same people.

This argument is literally no different than the Eddie Izzard standup on flags. Political boundaries were not used by anyone outside Europe, therefore technically they did not own the land according to the Europeans. So, when Europeans colonized the area and set up politically boundaries, they got to determine who owned what land.

Doesn't that logic seem kind of messed up? Well actually it doesn't because the people with the guns make the rules but eitherway...

When William Penn bought the land for Pennsylvania from the Iroquois, who lived way the hell up in New York state, the tribes that lived here were not happy they had to move. Ownership was not a European invention.
The invention of the "state" wasn't a big change, just a way to define the boundaries that had been in flux, between the Kings that owned the land.
Really no different than the Caliphs/War Lords/Chiefs around the globe that owned the land.
Individual ownership and property rights was one of the basic tenets of the United States, and highly unusual.

I've always wondered what made this land the Jews home and not anyone else's? They weren't the first people to live there, people have been living in that area for 10,000 years and Judaism is only around 3,000 years old.

The Jews were the only ones that didn't have a place to be sent back to when they became a pain in the ass somewhere else. So the rest of the world decided the Jews needed a homeland and established one where it all started, which was a desert sparsely populated by people that didn't own the land. The Arab and Persian states really didn't give a shit about the Jews until they became successful and an embarrassment.

[classicman]

BAM STIRS FEARS IN ISRAEL
COULD HALT DEATH BLOW TO HAMAS

AS WORLD leaders and international organizations rush to rescue Hamas, Israel faces complex bat tlefield challenges - while fearing a stab in the back from the incoming Obama administration.

Israel's leaders are asking themselves two questions: Is the cost of sending sufficient ground forces into Gaza just too high? And, upon his inauguration on Jan. 20, will President Obama undercut Israel's counterterror offensive before its goals have been reached?
Israel can deal with self-aggrandizing busybodies, such as French President Nicolas Sarkozy, whose irresponsible attempts to force a cease-fire upon Israel benefit only Hamas. (Carla, can't you give that guy something to do?) But Israel would be hard pressed to fight on without American support.

As government leaders and generals in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv weigh the question of whether or not to send tanks into Gaza's streets, they hear the clock ticking. A major ground incursion would take time. Would Israel Defense Forces soldiers find themselves fighting on political quicksand?

Despite the frankly anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish reporting of this conflict in the global media, Israel's military performance not only has been technically superb, but has been as humane as possible under such difficult circumstances.

From earlier briefings in Israel, I know the IDF takes an almost absurd degree of care in its targeting. The questioning doesn't stop with "Is that the right building?" it then asks, "What should be our angle of attack to ensure any rubble falls into the street, not atop the primary school next door?" (Hamas consistently embeds terror facilities among innocent civilians.)

Hitting a terrorist hideout in an apartment building, for example, an F-16 would be armed with the smallest warhead that could do the job. If the terrorists are tucked into rooms on the fourth floor, targeting officers evaluate which window the guided missile should go through to kill the terrorists, while minimizing harm to civilians living below.

Any military veteran can tell that the Israelis are taking enormous care to spare civilians. Given the number of airstrikes thus far and the hundreds of tons of bombs dropped, it remains remarkable that so few innocents have been injured in such a dense urban environment.

nuff said.