Wow. What a total mess the article and comments display.
The comments at this time are all from 3 regulars whom I respect, and they are not coming to any semblance of agreement, with each other or with Steve.
This issue is dividing the American left, dividing the America right, and dividing the sometimes more nuanced middle/independent fol…
Wow. What a total mess the article and comments display.
The comments at this time are all from 3 regulars whom I respect, and they are not coming to any semblance of agreement, with each other or with Steve.
This issue is dividing the American left, dividing the America right, and dividing the sometimes more nuanced middle/independent folks, where segments within each can be just as dogmatic and one-sided as the traditional left/right split.
Just like some other political, people are often describing similar values, but applied within a different set of selectively chosen "facts".
It seems pretty idealistic to hope that Palestinians and Israeli's can work out some agreement to bring peace, when the thoughtful intelligent folks in this comment thread are not succeeding, due to just a watered down subset of the issues dividing Israel/Gaza/West Bank.
I have no solution for the region; I can see the forces driving a self-reinforcing cycle of war and hatred but it's hard to discern what could effectively shift that towards a more peaceful coexistence on all sides. But I could try to nuance some particular issues at least. Like examining the hypothesis that Hamas is using civilians as shields. Or comparing what's happening now or stated intentions for the future to the definition of "genocide".
But the comments here are alas not sounding like in general there's a desire to nuance or consider both sides; it feels pretty self-righteously angry and hostile. I'm not seeing much space we we "argue in good faith and look at life from perspectives other than our own." (with "our own" meaning those on the side we are polarized in favor of, whether or not we are personally a member).
As I perceive it, we are not handling this touchy issue any better than the Critical Social Justice ideologues. And that's depressing.
And the best you can do is that tired "antisemitic" trope, the equation of Jews = Israel that has put innocent Jews all over the world in danger because people lile Alan Dershowitz and you insist that any criticism of the policies of the country Israel is nothing more than hatred of Jews.
What simpleminded rubbish.
And since nomenclatural accuracy is a fetish of mine, I need to point out that Semitic peoples are Sephardic Jews (second-class Israelis) and Palestinians, but that the European-descended Jews who rule Israel, as well as the settlers, are not.
I do think you know me well enough to know of my contempt for religions, all of them, as well as the greater contempt for nations that are founded by religious identity. Saudi Arabia has the Shahhadah on its flag; Israel has that stupid star. They can both sink into the ooze as far as I'm concerned.
Not sure why you're so focused on me, maybe it was my reaction to that libertarian fucktard that Anthony brought into our little group, but there are plenty in this discussion who are even less rah-rah Israel than I am.
Israel's solution is clear: expel or exterminate the Palestinians and take all their land as more Israel. This is indisputable. The filling of the WB is already too complete for the two-state solution, and Netanyahu HELPED Hamas to assure that Gaza and the WB were not united under the single leadership of the Palestinian Authority. And Netanyahu knew what they were.
1200 dead Israelis is a small cost for the expansion enabled by promoting the occupation to expanded borders. Gaza will be resettled, the WB will be completely taken, and then it's on to other nations.
Which America will meekly call "unhepful" and the money and weapons will keep coming.
Chris, can we calm down the rhetoric just a bit, among ourselves? I will try as well.
Let's stick to Gaza for the moment. Israel removed all settlements in 2005 (which were never very extensive). The population of Gaza has more than doubled since then. Israel has supplied water and electricity, and treatment of serious medical conditions is often done in Israel. There is a LOT to criticize about Israel's policies towards Gaza, but I have seen zero evidence that Israel is trying to reduce the population of Gaza, much less expel or exterminate them.
What convinces you that Israel is "indisputably" attempting to expel or exterminate the population of Gaza? Please, no yelling or insults, but a link to some factual article supporting your opinion would be appreciated. I'm asking you to support your goal of "championing objective reality", and I'll read any (reasonable length and available) source which supports that opinion.
I do think that the conservative coalition behind Netanyahu desires to take over most of the West Bank, and I think that's a terrible injustice, which many (but not enough) Israelis oppose. I'm asking for clarification about your assertion about Gaza, tho, not about the West Bank.
One problem in the area is that there are two fast growing populations: culturally conservative Palestinians (most of them), and culturally conservative Israelis (now a majority of Israel), both of which tend to have large families.
(True in the US as well; conservatives have larger families on average than modern liberals - but more pronounced in Israel since many of the more conservative parts of the Israeli population come from quite different nations and cultures than the more liberal parts do).
In Israel, this demographic shift is favoring the right side of the spectrum in democratic elections, alas. Israeli citizens whose families migrated from Arabic or Islamic nations tend to be more aggressive in their treatment of Palestinians - and they have no dual citizenship to allow them to happily return to the US or Europe if Israel fails. They have less (if any) faith in a solution of peaceful co-existence, largely due to their own experiences. Meanwhile, generations of Palestinians are growing up with understandable hatred of Israel. It's definitely a tragedy, with no easy solutions.
I think it’s abundantly clear that they are taking all of Gaza, presumably to be resettled, but several spokesmen have said that all Palestinians must leave.
Could you provide a link? In my research of the many, many points from both sides, I have never come across a spokesman for Israel who advocated for Israel even to 'eventually' take over and settle "all of Gaza" after forcing all Palestinians to leave, much less that they are doing so in present tense, but if you can provide some solid evidence that might shift my perspective. I'm astounded that I've never seen even the harsh critics of Israel document such a point, but you may be more familiar with the objective sources so I'm open to one or more links supporting your opinion.
OK, so your morning newsfeed included an Israeli spokesman who said that all Palestinians must leave Gaza, and further that the (2-2.5million) residents there should be divided into groups of 20-50K going to each Arab nation?
I'd really appreciate a link to that, so we can cooperatively verify the objective factuality of it. I assume you know where you get your morning newsfeed from, and the time and day you heard that.
But you have said that "several spokesmen" for Israel have stated that all Gazans must leave, so you could provide links to some of the other spokemen's words instead if that's easier.
I'm wondering about their exact words, and their credentials to speak on behalf of the Israeli government.
You aren't calling me a liar so I am not responding as though defending against such a charge.
However these statements came from reputable news sources, not nutcases on social media. And while Israel routinely suppresses news even after publication, I'm sure these are still extant.
Respectfully, however, I am not going to seek out links. You could do the same with exactly the same amount of effort, and since I already read them, it's you who needs to.
Not that there is any reason to doubt. Expansionism is Israel's 𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑠𝑜𝑛 𝑑'𝑒̂𝑡𝑟𝑒, which is why they are filling the West Bank with "settlements" to make sure Palestinians never again have their own state.
First, they said to evacuate northern Gaza, now they are leveling the south as well, and, yes, they are saying everyone needs to leave, and, no,. they will not leave it empty.
I never credit news from dubious sources and that even includes, in this instance, the Gray Lady. I typically read the Washington Post and Associated Press as I sip my morning coffee. In this affair the NYT has too pronounced a pro-Israel slant and I don't take them seriously there.
I do recommend Al Jazeera. Their avoidance of bias is impressive and they are much more textual than pictorial. But they'tr occasional reading for me, something I should change.
"The comments at this time are all from 3 regulars whom I respect, and they are not coming to any semblance of agreement, with each other or with Steve."
The symmetry is broken: I say many or most Israelis want to end the occupation and go two-state, Labia says all Palestinians are psychotic terrorists. The fact that they tortured WOMYN seems to have broken something.
I despise the settlers. I'm sure some of them are decent folk but as it happens I have never read or heard a word by one like that. Israel ships them in and sends them right out to the WB, they never even *enter* Israel. And they start making trouble the day they arrive.
OK, so if a future government of Israel were to withdraw all of the settlers in the West Bank (and they have zero settlers anywhere else so that's easy), do you think that Palestinians would allow Israel to exist within its own borders in peace?
Eventually, yes, After at least a generation, likelier two. In the short run, there is too much thirst for vengeance, amply justified. Israelis have gone far past any bounds excusable by self-defense and have killed Palestinians for sport, and when not killing they have been savagely cruel.
In one case soldiers were going house to house looking for some fugitive. While they tore apart a Palestinian woman's bedroom, with no room for anyone to hide, another unzipped his pants and urinated on her carpet. There was a toilet.
On the same search, a tank going down the street took a detour and reasonlessly crushed a man's taxi, destroying his livelihood.
Palestinians have ample reason to despise Israel. They won't forget soon.
Another question of clarification. By "settlers" do you mean the 700,000 Israeli settlers in the West Bank? Or do you mean all 9 million Israelis, which is what Hamas and the left in the West calls "settlers"? I suspect the former.
I think a two state solution might have worked in 1948 if the Arabs had accepted that plan, or perhaps in 1967. At this point, I don't see how it could work - it looks to me as if there would be two sovereign states in easy artillery and rocket range of each others, in perpetual full scale war - until it was reduced to one state or zero. In the abstract, a two state solution (or three state variant) seems like (1) the most ideal outcome in the abstract, and (2) a now obsolete fantasy which would end disastrously. And both sides have lots of responsibility for getting into this dilemma.
Both figures could be considered "correct" depending on whether you think the settlers in East Jerusalem to be OK, or part of the same problem as the other 450K outside of East Jerusalem.
450 K in West Bank excluding East Jerusalem
220 K in East Jerusalem
-------
670 K total settlers in West Bank including East Jerusalem
I consider the larger figure to be more relevant to discussion of Israeli settlement on the West Bank. If you have reason to consider the East Jerusalem settlements distinctly less problematic and thus excludable, I will listen. Perhaps I am naive to use the total including East Jerusalem when discussing the settler problem.
Wow. What a total mess the article and comments display.
The comments at this time are all from 3 regulars whom I respect, and they are not coming to any semblance of agreement, with each other or with Steve.
This issue is dividing the American left, dividing the America right, and dividing the sometimes more nuanced middle/independent folks, where segments within each can be just as dogmatic and one-sided as the traditional left/right split.
Just like some other political, people are often describing similar values, but applied within a different set of selectively chosen "facts".
It seems pretty idealistic to hope that Palestinians and Israeli's can work out some agreement to bring peace, when the thoughtful intelligent folks in this comment thread are not succeeding, due to just a watered down subset of the issues dividing Israel/Gaza/West Bank.
I have no solution for the region; I can see the forces driving a self-reinforcing cycle of war and hatred but it's hard to discern what could effectively shift that towards a more peaceful coexistence on all sides. But I could try to nuance some particular issues at least. Like examining the hypothesis that Hamas is using civilians as shields. Or comparing what's happening now or stated intentions for the future to the definition of "genocide".
But the comments here are alas not sounding like in general there's a desire to nuance or consider both sides; it feels pretty self-righteously angry and hostile. I'm not seeing much space we we "argue in good faith and look at life from perspectives other than our own." (with "our own" meaning those on the side we are polarized in favor of, whether or not we are personally a member).
As I perceive it, we are not handling this touchy issue any better than the Critical Social Justice ideologues. And that's depressing.
It appears to be from what I've seen so far, one guy with a seriously antisemitic bug up his ass.
No chance you mean anyone but me. of course.
And the best you can do is that tired "antisemitic" trope, the equation of Jews = Israel that has put innocent Jews all over the world in danger because people lile Alan Dershowitz and you insist that any criticism of the policies of the country Israel is nothing more than hatred of Jews.
What simpleminded rubbish.
And since nomenclatural accuracy is a fetish of mine, I need to point out that Semitic peoples are Sephardic Jews (second-class Israelis) and Palestinians, but that the European-descended Jews who rule Israel, as well as the settlers, are not.
I do think you know me well enough to know of my contempt for religions, all of them, as well as the greater contempt for nations that are founded by religious identity. Saudi Arabia has the Shahhadah on its flag; Israel has that stupid star. They can both sink into the ooze as far as I'm concerned.
Not sure why you're so focused on me, maybe it was my reaction to that libertarian fucktard that Anthony brought into our little group, but there are plenty in this discussion who are even less rah-rah Israel than I am.
Israel's solution is clear: expel or exterminate the Palestinians and take all their land as more Israel. This is indisputable. The filling of the WB is already too complete for the two-state solution, and Netanyahu HELPED Hamas to assure that Gaza and the WB were not united under the single leadership of the Palestinian Authority. And Netanyahu knew what they were.
1200 dead Israelis is a small cost for the expansion enabled by promoting the occupation to expanded borders. Gaza will be resettled, the WB will be completely taken, and then it's on to other nations.
Which America will meekly call "unhepful" and the money and weapons will keep coming.
Chris, can we calm down the rhetoric just a bit, among ourselves? I will try as well.
Let's stick to Gaza for the moment. Israel removed all settlements in 2005 (which were never very extensive). The population of Gaza has more than doubled since then. Israel has supplied water and electricity, and treatment of serious medical conditions is often done in Israel. There is a LOT to criticize about Israel's policies towards Gaza, but I have seen zero evidence that Israel is trying to reduce the population of Gaza, much less expel or exterminate them.
What convinces you that Israel is "indisputably" attempting to expel or exterminate the population of Gaza? Please, no yelling or insults, but a link to some factual article supporting your opinion would be appreciated. I'm asking you to support your goal of "championing objective reality", and I'll read any (reasonable length and available) source which supports that opinion.
I do think that the conservative coalition behind Netanyahu desires to take over most of the West Bank, and I think that's a terrible injustice, which many (but not enough) Israelis oppose. I'm asking for clarification about your assertion about Gaza, tho, not about the West Bank.
One problem in the area is that there are two fast growing populations: culturally conservative Palestinians (most of them), and culturally conservative Israelis (now a majority of Israel), both of which tend to have large families.
(True in the US as well; conservatives have larger families on average than modern liberals - but more pronounced in Israel since many of the more conservative parts of the Israeli population come from quite different nations and cultures than the more liberal parts do).
In Israel, this demographic shift is favoring the right side of the spectrum in democratic elections, alas. Israeli citizens whose families migrated from Arabic or Islamic nations tend to be more aggressive in their treatment of Palestinians - and they have no dual citizenship to allow them to happily return to the US or Europe if Israel fails. They have less (if any) faith in a solution of peaceful co-existence, largely due to their own experiences. Meanwhile, generations of Palestinians are growing up with understandable hatred of Israel. It's definitely a tragedy, with no easy solutions.
I think it’s abundantly clear that they are taking all of Gaza, presumably to be resettled, but several spokesmen have said that all Palestinians must leave.
Could you provide a link? In my research of the many, many points from both sides, I have never come across a spokesman for Israel who advocated for Israel even to 'eventually' take over and settle "all of Gaza" after forcing all Palestinians to leave, much less that they are doing so in present tense, but if you can provide some solid evidence that might shift my perspective. I'm astounded that I've never seen even the harsh critics of Israel document such a point, but you may be more familiar with the objective sources so I'm open to one or more links supporting your opinion.
One was talking about each Arab nation taking 20-50,000. On my morning news feed.
OK, so your morning newsfeed included an Israeli spokesman who said that all Palestinians must leave Gaza, and further that the (2-2.5million) residents there should be divided into groups of 20-50K going to each Arab nation?
I'd really appreciate a link to that, so we can cooperatively verify the objective factuality of it. I assume you know where you get your morning newsfeed from, and the time and day you heard that.
But you have said that "several spokesmen" for Israel have stated that all Gazans must leave, so you could provide links to some of the other spokemen's words instead if that's easier.
I'm wondering about their exact words, and their credentials to speak on behalf of the Israeli government.
You aren't calling me a liar so I am not responding as though defending against such a charge.
However these statements came from reputable news sources, not nutcases on social media. And while Israel routinely suppresses news even after publication, I'm sure these are still extant.
Respectfully, however, I am not going to seek out links. You could do the same with exactly the same amount of effort, and since I already read them, it's you who needs to.
Not that there is any reason to doubt. Expansionism is Israel's 𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑠𝑜𝑛 𝑑'𝑒̂𝑡𝑟𝑒, which is why they are filling the West Bank with "settlements" to make sure Palestinians never again have their own state.
First, they said to evacuate northern Gaza, now they are leveling the south as well, and, yes, they are saying everyone needs to leave, and, no,. they will not leave it empty.
I never credit news from dubious sources and that even includes, in this instance, the Gray Lady. I typically read the Washington Post and Associated Press as I sip my morning coffee. In this affair the NYT has too pronounced a pro-Israel slant and I don't take them seriously there.
I do recommend Al Jazeera. Their avoidance of bias is impressive and they are much more textual than pictorial. But they'tr occasional reading for me, something I should change.
"The comments at this time are all from 3 regulars whom I respect, and they are not coming to any semblance of agreement, with each other or with Steve."
The symmetry is broken: I say many or most Israelis want to end the occupation and go two-state, Labia says all Palestinians are psychotic terrorists. The fact that they tortured WOMYN seems to have broken something.
I despise the settlers. I'm sure some of them are decent folk but as it happens I have never read or heard a word by one like that. Israel ships them in and sends them right out to the WB, they never even *enter* Israel. And they start making trouble the day they arrive.
OK, so if a future government of Israel were to withdraw all of the settlers in the West Bank (and they have zero settlers anywhere else so that's easy), do you think that Palestinians would allow Israel to exist within its own borders in peace?
Eventually, yes, After at least a generation, likelier two. In the short run, there is too much thirst for vengeance, amply justified. Israelis have gone far past any bounds excusable by self-defense and have killed Palestinians for sport, and when not killing they have been savagely cruel.
In one case soldiers were going house to house looking for some fugitive. While they tore apart a Palestinian woman's bedroom, with no room for anyone to hide, another unzipped his pants and urinated on her carpet. There was a toilet.
On the same search, a tank going down the street took a detour and reasonlessly crushed a man's taxi, destroying his livelihood.
Palestinians have ample reason to despise Israel. They won't forget soon.
Another question of clarification. By "settlers" do you mean the 700,000 Israeli settlers in the West Bank? Or do you mean all 9 million Israelis, which is what Hamas and the left in the West calls "settlers"? I suspect the former.
I think a two state solution might have worked in 1948 if the Arabs had accepted that plan, or perhaps in 1967. At this point, I don't see how it could work - it looks to me as if there would be two sovereign states in easy artillery and rocket range of each others, in perpetual full scale war - until it was reduced to one state or zero. In the abstract, a two state solution (or three state variant) seems like (1) the most ideal outcome in the abstract, and (2) a now obsolete fantasy which would end disastrously. And both sides have lots of responsibility for getting into this dilemma.
I believe the WB settler population is 450,000 and that’s who I was talking about.
Both figures could be considered "correct" depending on whether you think the settlers in East Jerusalem to be OK, or part of the same problem as the other 450K outside of East Jerusalem.
450 K in West Bank excluding East Jerusalem
220 K in East Jerusalem
-------
670 K total settlers in West Bank including East Jerusalem
I consider the larger figure to be more relevant to discussion of Israeli settlement on the West Bank. If you have reason to consider the East Jerusalem settlements distinctly less problematic and thus excludable, I will listen. Perhaps I am naive to use the total including East Jerusalem when discussing the settler problem.
The 700K figure was just rounding.