Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

[Sheb]

Yeah, it seems the momentum for west Europen recognition of Palestine got rolling. Norway, Spain, France... And of course, Israel will now have to explain to them why it's occupying a state.

[smjjames]

That two year calendar deadline thing is pretty bold. Although, I wonder what will happen if that fails?

Dividing Jerusalem has been a real sticking point and could leave some holy sites on the wrong side of town. Isn't the Temple Mount like right in the middle and practically straddling the two halves?
 

[Sheb]

What will happen? Nothing in the short term: the Israeli government is perfectly fine with the state of thing: they live in relative peace and gets to steal land for their settlers constituency while the lashing out of the Palestinian provide a convenient enemy. In the medium terms, Israel will be more and more isolated diplomatically until proper sanctions gets established. Then, we might see a peace when the cost of continued occupation outweigh the benefits of colonization.

As for Jerusalem and the Holy Sites, Israel already has a deal with Jordan (made in 1993 I think) whereas Jordan is responsible for supervising some of the Holy sites, including the Al-Aqsa mosque on the Temple Mount.

[Reelya]

The last UN resolution for the 2-state peace settlement was passed 165-6, but then Vetoed by the USA, which was also the only UN security council member who voted against the peace settlement. The USA likes to put on an act of being a powerless impartial mediator, publically throwing up their hands in a "oy vey! what can you do?" fashion, but they're the #1 active participant in preventing the UN from taking action to resolve the conflict.

The "No" votes against a peace settlement were USA, Canada, Israel, and the rest were all previous territories and now "Associated States" of the USA, so 4/6 of the "no peace" votes were gained by the USA coralling it's pacific ex-territories, and Canada either had pressure from the USA, or was just scared to go against them (best-case scenario). So when you look at it, USA is the only non-Israel country that doesn't want peace in the middle east, and every other vote is gained by USA putting the screws on their neighbors and client states.

[Sheb]

Oh, Harper is entirely able to be a dick by himself. And I think the Czech voted against too for some reasons. Many European abstained as well.

[scriver]

Yeah, it seems the momentum for west Europen recognition of Palestine got rolling. Norway, Spain, France... And of course, Israel will now have to explain to them why it's occupying a state.

Norway, eh?

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I see no reason that the two-state solution would create any peace. The war would just continue unhindered, and the newly minted Palestine would break out into a Hamas-Fatah civil war immediately/almost immediately.

There's nothing for it. Israel has a decent population of people who are full-blown theocrats, and Hamas would stop for nothing less than genocide. Seriously, I think that might just be the hard truth of it, there will not be peace between Israel and Palestine in our lifetimes.

[Reelya]

The current situation isn't a war between equals though, it's an occupation with classic genocide tactics. So to characterize it as two equal sides who won't stop fighting is just wrong. Stop invading them is the first step.

It's like someone is in your face and keeps punching you and you occasionally hit back, and people saying "separating them won't do anything to stop the fighting - look that little guy who keeps getting punched a lot will just hit back".

How about all the arab nations that were previously fighting Israel, but aren't now? Basically every one of their neighbors. The only difference culturally is that the they don't live under an occupier's thumb and the Palestinians do. And Fatah / Hamas - those types of organizations only exist because of an occupation. You don't get such groups rising to power in other circumstances.

It's really colonialist logic to go "those natives who want the invaders out are just naturally belligerent types, we can't leave them alone because they'll kill each other". It's the presense of invaders that causes such groups to arise. To then use those groups existence as a justfitication to keep the evil oppressors in power is just. plain. wrong.

Lebanon is the classic example, invaded by Israel, under occupation for a long time, militant sects formed in response to the invasion, but Israel eventually was forced to pull out. Do we see Lebanese constantly trying to attack Israel now? No.

[Helgoland]

Once again, firing thousands of rockets - even if they're shitty rockets - on civilians is not 'occasionally punching back'.

Fatah - and especially Hamas, but that's another story - don't exist solely because of the occupation. They exist because during the occupation they were fostered by the Israel-hating neighboring countries, who btw kept the Palestinians in shitty consitions so they'd still want to fight Israel.

And lastly, do you think Palestinian statehood would make the two sides any more equal? If anything, Israel would have a solid casus belli because of the damn rockets.

[Sheb]

Well, it's not going to change much on the ground, but I think it's a prelude to Europe taking a harsher stance on Israel, or at least not being on Israel's side. As I see it, the only hope for peace is for Israel to actually have an interest in a peace settlement.

Also, rockets are only fired in the thousands whenever Israel attack Gaza.

[LordSlowpoke]

Once again, firing thousands of rockets - even if they're shitty rockets - on civilians is not 'occasionally punching back'.

spoiler alert: once you're pushed far enough that you're storing your weapons in tunnels because everything else is fucked you don't exactly have the guidance technology needed to aim at military targets

they had that when the soviet union was still alive and now it's not a thing

Fatah - and especially Hamas, but that's another story - don't exist solely because of the occupation. They exist because during the occupation they were fostered by the Israel-hating neighboring countries, who btw kept the Palestinians in shitty consitions so they'd still want to fight Israel.

"all palestinian authority groups exist because they're propped out by antisemites"

and as to the second,

Spoiler: consider the following (click to show/hide)

the only middle eastern country that could possibly assimilate the specific amounts of palestinians is

gee whiz pretty much only the uae because we both know that in israel that just ain't happening

please stop assuming that the area is full of developed, western countries which can afford to accommodate refugees over a tenth (or in jordan's case, a half) of the country's population

And lastly, do you think Palestinian statehood would make the two sides any more equal? If anything, Israel would have a solid casus belli because of the damn rockets.

it would make them more equal because israel would have to stand up and actually present a casus belli instead of casually strolling by every time the fascist overlords need their personal falklands and bombing some western-funded installations in the name of getting these glorious percentage points in the polls

stop pretending like you don't remember that their liberals are leaving the country in droves, it's a c+ country and there's no avoiding it

[Helgoland]

spoiler alert: once you're pushed far enough that you're storing your weapons in tunnels because everything else is fucked you don't exactly have the guidance technology needed to aim at military targets

They don't even try to hit military targets. They aim for civilians on purpose.

And no, not all Palestinian authority groups are propped up by anti-semites - there's all sorts of reasons, from domestic ones (hating Israel is kinda popular in the Middle East) to strategic ones (there's been rumors that Israel itself propped up Hamas to damage Fatah and torpedo a peaceful settlement). All I'm saying is that it's not the pure spirit of freedom that has led to the current situation.
And why assume assimilation is needed? Not keeping the refugees in camps for over four decades would help already.


And since when do countries need a casus belli to go to war? They just need to pretend they do, and Israel already does that. A Palestinian state however would be responsible for attacks originating from its territory, and thus a real casus belli would exist.

[LordSlowpoke]

spoiler alert: once you're pushed far enough that you're storing your weapons in tunnels because everything else is fucked you don't exactly have the guidance technology needed to aim at military targets

They don't even try to hit military targets. They aim for civilians on purpose.

hey, i can't even pretend to argue that they're trying anymore. it was a thing when they had clear means of doing so is what i'm saying.

And no, not all Palestinian authority groups are propped up by anti-semites - there's all sorts of reasons, from domestic ones (hating Israel is kinda popular in the Middle East) to strategic ones (there's been rumors that Israel itself propped up Hamas to damage Fatah and torpedo a peaceful settlement). All I'm saying is that it's not the pure spirit of freedom that has led to the current situation.

mhmm, fair enough in that case

i were wondering if you'd go full "but they built the ghetto they live in themselves!" but apparently that was a misjudgment of your character, for which i apologize for

And why assume assimilation is needed? Not keeping the refugees in camps for over four decades would help already.

...what exactly do you do with refugees, then? can't just let them wander whenever they'll want, the majority will just start forming slums and no side of the equation would like to be involved in that

it's either help them join society at large, keep them separated and pretend they don't exist unless there's a fourth way of doing things

arab states seem to be decent at combining 2&3 as illustrated by the palestinian issue we're talking about, but it's not like the syrians running away from their own circumstances are treated any better

And since when do countries need a casus belli to go to war? They just need to pretend they do, and Israel already does that. A Palestinian state however would be responsible for attacks originating from its territory, and thus a real casus belli would exist.

all things considered, yeah - israel does raid/air strike/etc. its neighbors seemingly arbitrarily already, with the exception of jordan which is bit of a special case

the bid for statehood is mostly a diplomatic thing, so we can actually draw up something resembling a land border - one that's not being constantly trimmed with the help of orthodox settlers and liberal applications of harassment and bulldozers

[smjjames]

It would be great if the Israeli liberals actually stayed and tried to do something about the problems.

Unless the Israeli government is actively trying to keep the liberals from doing anything.

[mainiac]

Well yeah, the bonus to killing people is not just that you support Hamas over Fatah, it's that you support Israeli rightwing over the left.