Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

The Israel/Palestine Conflict Mk. IV

Scroll to see replies

As someone who is coming at this debate from a neutral point of view, I am neither Jewish, nor Muslim, I have no axe to grind and no reason to support either side.

Looking at the bare facts of the situation, I find it almost impossible to feel anything other than extreme sympathy for the Palestinian people.

Take out of the equation who might be right or wrong, in terms of Hamas, or the Israeli government, there are a group of innocent people who are being killed and are pawns in a disgusting battle in which I feel either side would willingly see the other obliterated off the map.

Stop feigning neutrality. I have picked you up before about this. It is clear from your previous comment that you are anything but objective on this issue:

Original post by Huskaris

If I was a Palestinian I would be getting a knife out and stabbing as many of the baby killing ***** as I could.

Reply 6921

Protégé

Original post by ExcitedPup

So what do you think should have happened to the 500,000 Jews in Palestine in 1948? Why do you oppose self-determination for them?

They should have just lived there without trying to take over.

Reply 6922

ExcitedPup

Original post by Protégé

They should have just lived there without trying to take over.

They didn't try to "take over". The UN voted them a state, and then the Arabs tried to "take over" 100% of the land by force.

Reply 6923

Protégé

Original post by ExcitedPup

They didn't try to "take over". The UN voted them a state, and then the Arabs tried to "take over" 100% of the land by force.

I don't agree that the UN should have ultimate jurisdiction. Weren't Palestinians forcibly evicted from their homes? If the government was being oppressive to them then fair enough but I don't see why the civilians should be punished.

Reply 6924

ExcitedPup

Original post by LivngForSummer

You're the one who compared Isis' killings to Israel's!

I was pointing out the blatant double standard in fixating on Israel having killed 12,000 Palestinians in 60 years when that many Muslims were killed in one month by another group.

The fact that many Muslims fixate on mistakes or crimes by the only Jewish state in the world speaks to what is driving their opposition to Israel's existence.

If you think that logically leads to saying that Israel is the "Jewish ISIS", then you aren't the sharpest tool in the shed and you're probably unworthy of further discussion.

Your not doing us Jews or Israel any favors by supporting its blatant breach of International law.

I'm sorry but you don't know my religious upbringing or background, and you have no right to claim to speak on behalf of Jews.

Oh and if you want to see international law, then see this; (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine#The_vote)

The existence of Israel is lawful under international law.

Reply 6925

LivngForSummer

Original post by ExcitedPup

I was pointing out the blatant double standard in fixating on Israel having killed 12,000 Palestinians in 60 years when that many Muslims were killed in one month by another group.

The fact that many Muslims fixate on mistakes or crimes by the only Jewish state in the world speaks to what is driving their opposition to Israel's existence.

If you think that logically leads to saying that Israel is the "Jewish ISIS", then you aren't the sharpest tool in the shed and you're probably unworthy of further discussion.

I'm sorry but you don't know my religious upbringing or background, and you have no right to claim to speak on behalf of Jews.

Oh and if you want to see international law, then see this; (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine#The_vote)

The existence of Israel is lawful under international law.

Whataboutery.

Reply 6926

ExcitedPup

Original post by Protégé

I don't agree that the UN should have ultimate jurisdiction.

If not the UN, then who? The British Empire took the Palestine area from the Ottoman Empire in World War 1. At that point, the League of Nations set up the Mandate of Palestine, which was overseen by the British. Post-1945, the British wanted nothing to do with it and were pulling out, some settlement had to be made.

The UN had responsibility as the successor organisation to the League of Nations, almost like the internatinoal equivalent of a guardian.

Weren't Palestinians forcibly evicted from their homes?

That's a very complex area. Many Palestinians fled from their homes voluntarily (and particularly in the face of alarmist broadcasts on the radio from Arab broadcasters telling them the Jews were coming to rape them; the broadcasters hoped it would cause them to attack the Israelis, but instead many just took their belongings and left. You can see more about that in this documentary from the history channel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usihmYTke9I)

It's also true to say some Palestinians were forcibly evicted for reasons of military security, and sometimes in war crimes, and there were some massacres. There were also evictions and massacres of Jews as well.

The important and fundamental point though is that there are 1.1 million Arab Israelis today living within the 1967 borders with full citizenship rights (these are not the palestinians WB/Gaza, but full Arab citizens in Israel), their ancestors were not evicted from their homes, and particularly in the north. The main areas where there were evictions were areas where there was heavy fighting.

It is unfortunate, but that is war and none of that would have happened if the Arabs had not rejected the UN partition and tried to seize 100% of the land by force. Sometimes, you just have to accept and move on (just as the Germans did after World War 2, their borders with Poland were moved much further to the west and they lost much land; they did not create a "resistance" against Poland, they moved on) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germany%E2%80%93Poland_border#/media/File:Border_changes_in_history_of_Poland.png)

There is sorrow on both sides. But the narrative of some evil grand plan of Palestinian genocide is hysterical, and not historically factual

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 6927

ExcitedPup

Original post by LivngForSummer

Whataboutery.

I don't think you understand what that word means.

If you bring up international law as a standard that must be obeyed, then you must accept that Israel has a legitimate right to exist under international law

Reply 6928

Protégé

Original post by ExcitedPup

If not the UN, then who? The British Empire took the Palestine area from the Ottoman Empire in World War 1. At that point, the League of Nations set up the Mandate of Palestine, which was overseen by the British. Post-1945, the British wanted nothing to do with it and were pulling out, some settlement had to be made.

The UN had responsibility as the successor organisation to the League of Nations, almost like the internatinoal equivalent of a guardian

Honestly, if I led a country and the UN tried to order me about I'd tell them to piss off. I would be very open to any suggestions but I wouldn't accept if they actually tried and forced the country to do something. Anyway, isn't the UN now against Israel? Many claim that the UN is biased against Israel.

That's a very complex area. Many Palestinians fled from their homes voluntarily (and particularly in the face of alarmist broadcasts on the radio from Arab broadcasters telling them the Jews were coming to rape them; the broadcasters hoped it would cause them to attack the Israelis, but instead many just took their belongings and left. You can see more about that in this documentary from the history channel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usihmYTke9I)

It's also true to say some Palestinians were forcibly evicted for reasons of military security, and sometimes in war crimes, and there were some massacres. There were also evictions and massacres of Jews as well.

The important and fundamental point though is that there are 1.1 million Arab Israelis today living within the 1967 borders, their ancestors were not evicted from their homes, and particularly in the north. The main areas where there were evictions were areas where there was heavy fighting.

It is unfortunate, but that is war and none of that would have happened if the Arabs had not rejected the UN partition and tried to seize 100% of the land by force. Sometimes, you just have to accept and move on (just as the Germans did after World War 2, their borders with Poland were moved much further to the west and they lost much land; they did not create a "resistance" against Poland, they moved on)

There is sorrow on both sides. But the narrative of some evil grand plan of Palestinian genocide is hysterical, and not historically factual

Ah, fear is quite the motivation for prejudice. What do you mean that they were evicted for military security? I think that it's their right to hold all of the land, it was theirs in the first place, no? I don't blame the governments for genocide as long as it wasn't ordered by the state, in the Vietnam war there were masacres by both sides but neither sides had it in their best interests to do so.

Why was there a suggestion for a partition anyway, was it because the Jewish people were discriminated against?

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 6929

averageteen16

https://jewishvoiceforpeace.org/content/israeli-palestinian-conflict-101

Watch this it will tell you clearly the history of the conflict okay

Reply 6930

SotonianOne

Original post by LivngForSummer

I wouldn't live in Israel if they paid me and ironically that how they are increasing their Jewish population- paying people to live their

How retardedly false and misinformed.

Reply 6931

SotonianOne

Original post by Raymat

There's charges for being joined to the student union? Does this apply to all societies?

It's theoretically more of a donation but when you consider that it is a college-run union that prevents you from attending tutor periods and cuts you off from some facilities it's more of a charge.

Reply 6932

IllmaticLUPE

I guess we should defend Israel's illegal settlements.
It's bombings of hospitals and schools.
Constant destruction of whole areas with phosphorus and bombs [I can see why people are ANGRY and go to extreme measures such as suicide bombing - it's not as if they've got an air force to join to kill people 'legally']
Im pretty sure you will be eager to defend all the 65 UN resolutions that Israel has broken?
Probably defend Israel attacking an aid convoy in international waters?

It doesn't require a historian to look at a 100 year history lesson, all they've got to do is look at the facts and who's committing the crimes against international law.

Reply 6933

LivngForSummer

Original post by ExcitedPup

I've kind of adopted that word into my everyday vocabulary to brush off waffling, I use it frequently, especially when talking about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict because I usually find that the person I'm talking to is very unlearned about the issue. Where did I say "Israel has no right to exist under international law"? Personally, I don't think the creation of Israel was necessary or just but now its here I am all for a one state solution with a regime change. I don't know if it will work but I doubt two states are possible with so many illegal settlements in Palestinian territory.

Reply 6934

ExcitedPup

Original post by Protégé

Honestly, if I led a country and the UN tried to order me about I'd tell them to piss off.

There wasn't really a Palestinian leadership per se, because it didn't exist as a state and had never been a state. The Arab world claimed the right to negotiate on their behalf, and in many ways botched it.

In life, you can often stand on your rights, and demand satisfaction, and say your pride and dignity will not allow you to take one step back. And practically speaking, you end up where the Palestinians are now.

Or you can be pragmatic, sensible, and if the Palestinians had done this they would have a state that was bigger than Israel, and 60 years of continuous sovereignty. Working together, the two countries probably would have become quite prosperous.

I wouldn't accept if they actually tried and forced the country to do something

If we are talking about forcing, then what right did the Palestinian Muslims have to forcibly rule over the Jews in Palestine?

Anyway, isn't the UN now against Israel? Many claim that the UN is biased against Israel.

The UN Human Rights Council is definitely biased against Israel, they only have one standing agenda item and that is Israel. In some years, the majority of resolutions passed have been passed against Israel. That's what you get when countries like Saudi Arabia are leading members of a human rights council.

As to the UN generally, they oppose Israeli settlements and on that I agree with the UN. But that does not overturn or undermine the fundamental legality of the State of Israel within the 1967 borders.

What do you mean that they were evicted for military security?

Israeli convoys on the road from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem were being ambushed by Arab villages. Some Arab villages were emptied / evicted. It was a tough war, and Israel was fighting for its survival. After all, only a few years before that, we the Allies had killed 100,000 civilians in one night in the firebombing of Tokyo. War is difficult, and cruel, and I think it behooves us not to apply some very strict standard to Israel that we are not applying to other people

Millions of Germans were forced out of their homes and made refugees in the aftermath of World War 2, as Poland's borders were pushed west at the expense of Germany. That is, unfortunately, life.

Having said that, the majority of cases where Palestinians left their homes was voluntarily to escape fighitng of both sides, or in response to radio broadcasts

I think that it's their right to hold all of the land, it was theirs in the first place, no?

Who is they, though? If we're going to say the very first place, then it was the Kingdom of Israel. If we are going to say the "last" first place before the mandate, then it belongs to the Ottoman Turks.

Why was there a suggestion for a partition anyway, was it because the Jewish people were discriminated against?

There had been quite a lot of violence against Jewish people in Palestine, all throughout that period

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1929_Hebron_massacre

And I can understand that the Jews of Palestine would not feel safe under the Palestinian Arabs, after all, their religious leader the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem had met with Hitler during World War 2 and made an alliance with him

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haj_Amin_al-Husseini#/media/File:Bundesarchiv_Bild_146-1987-004-09A,_Amin_al_Husseini_und_Adolf_Hitler.jpg

I can understand that, given the Jews had been killed in their millions, that other countries had not exactly opened up their gates to Jewish refugees pre-1939, and that many Palestinians had sympathies with the Third Reich, that the Jews of Palestine would say, "We cannot rely on anyone else for our safety, we can only rely on ourselves and a nation-state is the way to do that"

Reply 6935

felamaslen

Original post by LivngForSummer

The population has grown INSPITE of Israel's ethnic cleansing. The area has always had a larger Palestinian population throughout history and they tend to have lots of kids per family.

There was ethnic cleansing in the early 40s maybe. Not today. Not for a long time.

Reply 6936

ExcitedPup

Original post by LivngForSummer

I am all for a one state solution

In which case there are more Israeli Jews than Palestinian Muslims, so the Israelis will rule that one state. There are about 6 million Jews and 4 million Palestinians, including WB/Gaza

In fact, some far-right Israelis have called for exactly that; for Israel to completely annex the West Bank and give its citizens voting rights

with a regime change

Presumably what you actually mean is a dictatorship, because you could not accept that even with a single-state the Jewish people would be a majority, so you would want to take away their voting rights? How would you square that circle?

Reply 6937

LivngForSummer

Original post by felamaslen

There was ethnic cleansing in the early 40s maybe. Not today. Not for a long time.

I don't class last summer as 'Not for a long time."

Reply 6938

Jacky Hearts

A very simple way of the Israel-Palestine argument:

One state vs another state which causes a lot of innocent civilians to die.

If someone ask you who's side you're on the answer should really be very straightforward: 'the people's'.

Reply 6939

ExcitedPup

Original post by Protégé

Why was there a suggestion for a partition anyway, was it because the Jewish people were discriminated against?

In addition to all I've written above, it's worthwhile remembering that a majority of Israelis today are descended from Jews who fled from places like Iraq, Iran, Yemen and Egypt in the early 1950s

That's why if you go to Israel today, you'll see that many of them look middle Eastern because they are middle eastern.