Sam Harris on the Israel-Palestine Conflict

Nodin

marienbad wrote: »

How about not firing rockets ?

"but Hamas............"

The rockets are coming from Gaza. The settlements are in the Golan, Arab East Jerusalem and the West Bank. Fatah does not fire rockets, and as a reward gets settlers. The message this sends is fairly clear.

marienbad

Nodin wrote: »

"but Hamas............"

The rockets are coming from Gaza. The settlements are in the Golan, Arab East Jerusalem and the West Bank. Fatah does not fire rockets, and as a reward gets settlers. The message this sends is fairly clear.

Indeed, as I already said quite a few times , it is probably too late at this stage .

But as long as there are any rockets there is no possibility of change within Israel .

By the way have you any comment on the role of Egypt and the wider community ?

Nodin

marienbad wrote: »

Indeed, as I already said quite a few times , it is probably too late at this stage

But as long as there are any rockets there is no possibility of change within Israel ..?

More crap. Theres no rockets from anywhere else and theres no halt to the colonising there. This was going on before Hamas, and were they to commit mass suicide it would continue.

marienbad wrote: »

By the way have you any comment on the role of Egypt and the wider community ?

To generalise - Spineless gits either bought off or bullied by the US.

marienbad

Nodin wrote: »

More crap. Theres no rockets from anywhere else and theres no halt to the colonising there. This was going on before Hamas, and were they to commit mass suicide it would continue.



To generalise - Spineless gits either bought off or bullied by the US.

Jeez Nodin is it just always indignation with you ?

Maybe Egypt (and others) just don't like Hamas either ?

Nodin

marienbad wrote: »

Jeez Nodin is it just always indignation with you ?

Maybe Egypt (and others) just don't like Hamas either ?

"but Hamas..." again. Dear o dear.

Is Israel whittling down the Palestinian population of Arab East Jerusalem because of Hamas?

marienbad

Nodin wrote: »

"but Hamas..." again. Dear o dear.

Is Israel whittling down the Palestinian population of Arab East Jerusalem because of Hamas?

Well they provide a very good justification for Israel's target audience .

Stop looking at bits of the puzzle and try and see the whole .

Sacksian

The main lesson from any conflict resolution process (including our own and that of SA) is that a level of pragmatism is necessary on both sides for peace to prevail.

As such, despite Israeli protestations to the contrary, it's obvious that any potential agreement is going to require a dialogue with Hamas. And Hamas are likely going to have to cede some (political) ground too, and possibly alienate some of their support in so doing (something we saw in our peace process).

Whatever about the rhetoric reserved for domestic political audiences, every peace process has required a bit of realpolitik.

Nodin

marienbad wrote: »

Well they provide a very good justification for Israel's target audience ..

I'm sure they do. That doesn't excuse you trotting them out though.

marienbad

Nodin wrote: »

I'm sure they do. That doesn't excuse you trotting them out though.

you are just going all ad hominem now Nodin . You mightn't like the reality but it is the reality. And why do I need to be excused for pointing that out ?

Again you are conflating recognition of a fact with approval of a fact.

Nodin

marienbad wrote: »

you are just going all ad hominem now Nodin . You mightn't like the reality but it is the reality. And why do I need to be excused for pointing that out ?

Again you are conflating recognition of a fact with approval of a fact.

More guff. Israel is expanding because partys within that state wish it to do so. When its activities are pointed out to you all you can come out with is "pragmatism" "hamas" "rockets" and vile nonsense about Israel being "a part of the fabric of western civilisation".

Frank Lee Midere

marienbad wrote: »

Sorry Nodin , this is just self righteous venting. To compare this to South Africa is just an easy way out. And the history of the Jews and Israel is inextricably linked with and part of western civilisation . Even the most cursory reading of history shows that. And if it wasn't the problem wouldn't have arisen and persisted in the first place.

And by the way stop equating a pragmatic reading as approval .

As I have already said anger and indignation is not an argument . So what do you think will happen as opposed to what should happen ?

Do you think there is anything from the other side that could be done to help break the impasse ?

Given what I have been reading on Israeli and American blogs, the J Post and some Israeli politicians the ultimate aim of some forms of Zionism is ethnic cleansing and genocide. Which you would no doubt see as pragmatic.

marienbad

Nodin wrote: »

More guff. Israel is expanding because partys within that state wish it to do so. When its activities are pointed out to you all you can come out with is "pragmatism" "hamas" "rockets" and vile nonsense about Israel being "a part of the fabric of western civilisation".

Again just more venting and ad hominem . Are you seriously contending that I needed you to point out Israel's activities to me ? And indeed Israel is expanding because of forces within . I have already alluded to the power of those forces .And what have you to offer to counteract this ??

Nothing , just hand wringing and righteous bluster and some vague notion of sanctions.

If the Palestinians had been given more hardheaded pragmatic advice down the years they might have been much better off.

Already with the situation in the Ukraine this will move off the front pages and it is back to business as usual.

And in the meantime lets not discuss Hamas and what they might do to alleviate the situation .

marienbad

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

Given what I have been reading on Israeli and American blogs, the J Post and some Israeli politicians the ultimate aim of some forms of Zionism is ethnic cleansing and genocide. Which you would no doubt see as pragmatic.

I have no doubt that this is the aim of an ever growing percentage of the population . And the voices of dissent are virtually silent at this stage .

Because I recognise that fact and alluded to it in an earlier post , does that somehow indicate approval ?

Nodin

marienbad wrote: »

If the Palestinians had been given more hardheaded pragmatic advice down the years they might have been much better off.

.........

What? Like 'Grease your ass and try to like it'?

Parties within Israel want the state to expand its borders. The Palestinians are the ones on the receiving end of that aggression and - having had all legal avenues closed to them - are in no position to defend themselves.

Icepick

Nodin wrote: »

What? Like 'Grease your ass and try to like it'?

Parties within Israel want the state to expand its borders. The Palestinians are the ones on the receiving end of that aggression and - having had all legal avenues closed to them - are in no position to defend themselves.

In no position before they even tried building a peaceful society...
Again, why did they buy weapons and build tunnels to Israel instead?

R P McMurphy

Icepick wrote: »

In no position before they even tried building a peaceful society...
Again, why did they buy weapons and build tunnels to Israel instead?

Do palestinians have a right to self defense? The entire area needs to be demilitarised and this is the wish of those living in gaza but israel needs to demilitarise the entire border area ... and get out of the west bank and east Jerusalem

Akrasia

marienbad wrote: »

So you have no suggestions then ? Israel all bad - everyone else all good ?

Good luck with that . Is it surprising the Israelis trust only themselves ?

The only possible solution to this conflict is as follows

1. Israel and Palestinian leaders agree on new borders for a viable two state solution

2. The international community offers Palestine aid and assistance in building a modern democratic state complete with education health and security forces. This aid will be critical. It needs to be generous and transparent but also strictly monitored so that it is spent on developing the state, and not on weapons or to create a theocratic dictatorship.

3. This aid is contingent on the palestinians treating any attacks against Israel as acts of terrorism and the any members of any organisations who commit violent attacks against israel are criminals and dealt with by the criminal justice system in palestine.

4. Israel accepts that there will be a period of time, perhaps extending more than a decade, where the palestinian state will be incapable of preventing all attacks against israel. Israel offers support to the palestinian people to bring terrorists to justice using the courts, and not military attacks.

All of the above are much much easier said than done because of intransigence on both sides. The borders will probably have to change so that Palestine is one block of land and not seperated districts within Israel

All the settlers living within the new borders of Palestine would have to be compensated and relocated

Without the above, I can never see a happy ending to this debacle. But unfortunately, I can't see the fanatics on either side accepting such a solution

robindch

Nodin wrote: »

The rockets are coming from Gaza.

Being sophistical briefly, I believe the rockets are most likely come from Russia - well known talker about peace in that region, as it is in many others.

Nodin

robindch wrote: »

Being sophistical briefly, I believe the rockets are most likely come from Russia - well known talker about peace in that region, as it is in many others.

Actually, they're in the vast majority homemade.

Nodin

Yep, they 'just want peace'

"The Israel Defense Forces has issued an expropriation order for land in the West Bank village of Ein Yabrud, so that settlers from the nearby Amona outpost can continue using a road that crosses the land.
The 6.4-dunam (slightly over an acre) plot is owned by Palestinians. The road, like Amona itself, was built without a permit.
Last summer, after the High Court of Justice heard at length a petition filed by the Yesh Din human rights organization on behalf of the landowners, part of the road was destroyed. A new access road was rebuilt along what had been a public road when the Jordanians controlled the West Bank, from 1948 to 1967."
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.609313

recedite

Sacksian wrote: »

I'm pretty sure that there have been attempts to ban parties on the basis that they did not recognise the state of Israel, rather than any attempt to minimise Arab-Israeli participation...

Israel is, by definition, a jewish nation state
Therefore I can't see any effective difference between the two points you are trying to differentiate.

Icepick

Nodin wrote: »

Yep, they 'just want peace'

"The Israel Defense Forces has issued an expropriation order for land in the West Bank village of Ein Yabrud, so that settlers from the nearby Amona outpost can continue using a road that crosses the land.
The 6.4-dunam (slightly over an acre) plot is owned by Palestinians. The road, like Amona itself, was built without a permit.
Last summer, after the High Court of Justice heard at length a petition filed by the Yesh Din human rights organization on behalf of the landowners, part of the road was destroyed. A new access road was rebuilt along what had been a public road when the Jordanians controlled the West Bank, from 1948 to 1967."
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.609313

Religious fundamentalists in Israel are of course part of the problem as this is a religious and tribal conflict.
Firing rockets and building tunnels won't help.
And too few people are rational enough to point out that religion is the main problem here.

Nodin

Icepick wrote: »

Religious fundamentalists in Israel are of course part of the problem as this is a religious and tribal conflict.
Firing rockets and building tunnels won't help.
And too few people are rational enough to point out that religion is the main problem here.

Religion is part of the problem, but certainly not the whole of it, or even the majority.

If you've an alternative to "firing rockets and building tunnels" please tell us what it is, bearing in mind the bunch that don't fire rockets and build tunnels haven't prospered from their restraint.

tayto lover

Nodin wrote: »

Religion is part of the problem, but certainly not the whole of it, or even the majority.

If you've an alternative to "firing rockets and building tunnels" please tell us what it is, bearing in mind the bunch that don't fire rockets and build tunnels haven't prospered from their restraint.

Chris Hedges Gaza Diarys are a great read to the problems that exist in Palestine --

http://www.bintjbeil.com/articles/en/011001_hedges.html

strobe

Nodin wrote: »

If you've an alternative to "firing rockets and building tunnels" please tell us what it is, bearing in mind the bunch that don't fire rockets and build tunnels haven't prospered from their restraint.

An ongoing campaign of non-violent resistance is the only viable alternative and the only one with any hope of success. Israel are justified (or seen to be or can claim to be) in their actions precisely because they can point to 'firing rockets and building tunnels'. Tens of thousands of Israeli's once poured onto the streets of Jerusalem in protest at the Israeli states murder of non-violent Palestinians not all so long ago. The same could, and in my opinion would in time, happen again, if the Palestinians Ghandi'd the fvck out of things.

Nodin

strobe wrote: »

An ongoing campaign of non-violent resistance is the only viable alternative and the only one with any hope of success. Israel are justified (or seen to be or can claim to be) in their actions precisely because they can point to 'firing rockets and building tunnels'. Tens of thousands of Israeli's once poured onto the streets of Jerusalem in protest at the Israeli states murder of non-violent Palestinians not all so long ago. The same could, and in my opinion would in time, happen again, if the Palestinians Ghandi'd the fvck out of things.

That presumes a few things. As I've said, its been non-violent in the West Bank for years now - they've seen now reward. And the talks -
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/jan/23/palestine-papers-expose-peace-concession
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4515821,00.html

There is no "carrot" for Israel greater than the gathering of territory, in order to draw them towards an agreement. There is no stick of any shape or size to force them towards an agreement. Following what they perceive as their own best interest, they pursue expansion.

Passive resistance assumes that there is sufficient empathy and restraint on the part of the opposition, which seems to be badly lacking here. In Gandhis specific case, he led an increasingly restless population, many of whom did turn to violence, against a regime that ruled only with the support of sections of the Indian population. As that support drained and given the distance involved, all factors combined to give victory. However there aren't the distances or numerical disparity in this case.

kylith

strobe wrote: »

An ongoing campaign of non-violent resistance is the only viable alternative and the only one with any hope of success. Israel are justified (or seen to be or can claim to be) in their actions precisely because they can point to 'firing rockets and building tunnels'. Tens of thousands of Israeli's once poured onto the streets of Jerusalem in protest at the Israeli states murder of non-violent Palestinians not all so long ago. The same could, and in my opinion would in time, happen again, if the Palestinians Ghandi'd the fvck out of things.

TBF Hamas can certainly claim to be justified because of the invasion by Israel.

R P McMurphy

Icepick wrote: »

Religious fundamentalists in Israel are of course part of the problem as this is a religious and tribal conflict.
Firing rockets and building tunnels won't help.
And too few people are rational enough to point out that religion is the main problem here.

Control over land and the resources within are the main issue. Religion is just a convenient cover

Cabaal

I think this video basically just sums up this region

http://sploid.gizmodo.com/all-middle-eastern-territorial-fights-explained-in-one-1617510369?utm_campaign=socialflow_gizmodo_facebook&utm_source=gizmodo_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow

This video stars in order of appearance

Early Man

Canaanite

Egyptian

Assyrian

Israelite

Babylonian

Macedonian/Greek

Greek/Macedonian

Ptolemaic

Seleucid

Hebrew Priest

Maccabee

Roman

Byzantine

Arab Caliph

Crusader

Mamluk of Egypt

Ottoman Turk

Arab

British

Palestinian

European Jew/Zionist

PLO/Hamas/Hezbollah

State of Israel

Guerrilla/Freedom Fighter/Terrorist

and finally…

The Angel of Death

The only winner in all these battles has been death, all because they all believe they have a god given right to a bit of land.

strobe

kylith wrote: »

TBF Hamas can certainly claim to be justified because of the invasion by Israel.

Of course they can. And here we sit again.

Brown Bomber

Cabaal wrote: »

I think this video basically just sums up this region

http://sploid.gizmodo.com/all-middle-eastern-territorial-fights-explained-in-one-1617510369?utm_campaign=socialflow_gizmodo_facebook&utm_source=gizmodo_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow

This video stars in order of appearance



The only winner in all these battles has been death, all because they all believe they have a god given right to a bit of land.

Not even going to Watch this video after the last racist rant you posted, though I can tell you straight away it's Another sham.


The PLO are staunchly secular. Palestine's most infamous terrorist was atheist. The originator of Zionism was atheist along with Israel's first President and many after.

Icepick

R P McMurphy wrote: »

Control over land and the resources within are the main issue. Religion is just a convenient cover

Do jews fight with jews over the land and resources in Israel?
It's incredible how people try to take religion out of the equation even when both sides tell us that the conflict is religious and cultural.

Cabaal

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Not even going to Watch this video after the last racist rant you posted, though I can tell you straight away it's Another sham.

Racist??,
I posted no such thing, I expect an apology and a retraction for your comment!

May I remind you that I've made it extremely clear that I support neither side of this conflict, they are both very much guilty of some awful crimes and are very far from innocent.

Anyway, as I said I want your claim of me being racist retracted and an apology from you made on thread.

Dades

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Not even going to Watch this video after the last racist rant you posted, though I can tell you straight away it's Another sham.

BB - have you forgotten our last correspondence? I really don't think you can justify this comment so I strongly suggest you refrain from making any more.

Cabaal wrote: »

Racist??...I want your claim of me being racist retracted and an apology.

Let's face it - nobody has even apologised on a forum in the history of the Internet. You may deserve one, but asking for one is a fruitless exercise only going to go lead to disappointment and a big stand-off.

Brown Bomber

Cabaal wrote: »

Racist??,
I posted no such thing, I expect an apology and a retraction for your comment!

May I remind you that I've made it extremely clear that I support neither side of this conflict, they are both very much guilty of some awful crimes and are very far from innocent.

Anyway, as I said I want your claim of me being racist retracted and an apology from you made on thread.

I genuinely apologise for my language being sloppy and giving you the impression I was insulting you. This was never my intention. The "racist rant" I was referring to was the unashamedly "racist rant" ... "you posted" by Pat Condell.

Dades

Thanks for the clarification.

recedite

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Not even going to Watch this video after the last racist rant you posted, though I can tell you straight away it's Another sham...
The originator of Zionism was atheist along with Israel's first President and many after.

The last video was thinly veiled hate speech tbh, but this one is quite a good cartoon, I like the way the one song continues right through to the end, very apt.

The founder of Zionism, Herzl, a smart guy, possibly an atheist jew, like Einstein. I doubt he thought it would turn out the way it has though. He probably envisioned a diverse and tolerant society. Not a landgrabbing, school bombing, militaristic blight on the whole levant region.

Anyway, the specific jewish claim to Palestinian land is a biblical claim, based on a religious belief, and closely following the biblical description of The Promised Land.

Brian Shanahan

Dades wrote: »

Let's face it - nobody has even apologised on a forum in the history of the Internet. You may deserve one, but asking for one is a fruitless exercise only going to go lead to disappointment and a big stand-off.

*cough, cough* I have. *cough, cough*

Though to be honest it is very rare that people will apologise for saying something inflammatory/wrong/stupid/slanderous (delete as appropriate). And most of the time it's not going to be because somebody else complains of it.

obplayer

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

*cough, cough* I have. *cough, cough*

Though to be honest it is very rare that people will apologise for saying something inflammatory/wrong/stupid/slanderous (delete as appropriate). And most of the time it's not going to be because somebody else complains of it.

So have I. It can be done!

jank

Nodin wrote: »

Religion is part of the problem, but certainly not the whole of it, or even the majority.

If you've an alternative to "firing rockets and building tunnels" please tell us what it is, bearing in mind the bunch that don't fire rockets and build tunnels haven't prospered from their restraint.

Well the West Bank is not a smouldering wreck so therein lies the benefits of not launching rockets...

Nodin

jank wrote: »

Well the West Bank is not a smouldering wreck so therein lies the benefits of not launching rockets...

It's being colonised, and its inhabitants live under a form of apartheid. Those are not "benefits".

PopePalpatine

Nodin wrote: »

It's being colonised, and its inhabitants live under a form of apartheid. Those are not "benefits".

You'd think Jank might accept the Palestinians' right to property, which keeps getting violated by Israeli settlers.

SeaBreezes

jank wrote: »

Well the West Bank is not a smouldering wreck so therein lies the benefits of not launching rockets...

Have you seen the article listed below? Apparently thats how you get treated when you peacefully dont move off land you have the legal right to...

And you still cant drive on 'israeli' roads, might have to wait hours at a checkpoint in an ambulance if its curfew and palestinians cant leave their houses (seriously? Your not allowed leave your house? Cause its a jewish holiday and your palestinian? Fffssss)

For shame Israel. For shame.


http://bbc.com/news/magazine-27883685
So here's a Christian Palestinian family who are committed to peace, who legally own their land yet the Israelis have bulldozed their livelihood, blocked the entrance to their land, forced the family out at gunpoint and forced them into paying tens of thousands of their own money to try and fight for their right to stay on their own land. They have been fighting for nearly a quarter of a century when they have the deeds in black and white.

jank

Nodin wrote: »

It's being colonised, and its inhabitants live under a form of apartheid. Those are not "benefits".

Dear dear Nodin, that is an answer to question I have not put forward. The initial line of questioning was straight forward, what is the alternative to firing rockets and building tunnels. The answer is obvious, don't do either.

The benefit as I mentioned already is that your area is not turned into a war zone as it is clear in this case that the West Bank is not a smouldering wreck unlike Gaza. I think even the most naive or most pro-Palestinian would recognise that this is a good thing... right? Unless you like dead Arabs for the ideological reason for sticking it to Israel from a comfy safe home in Dublin.

Nowhere did I mention however that things were sweet in the west bank garden which is where your last post comes in and I admit there are issues to be resolved there. Now of course you seem to think that being colonised seems to be a legitimate reason to launch terror attacks on civilian areas. You can clarify if you want.

Nodin

jank wrote: »

Dear dear Nodin, that is an answer to question I have not put forward. The initial line of questioning was straight forward, what is the alternative to firing rockets and building tunnels. The answer is obvious, don't do either.

The benefit as I mentioned already is that your area is not turned into a war zone as it is clear in this case that the West Bank is not a smouldering wreck unlike Gaza. I think even the most naive or most pro-Palestinian would recognise that this is a good thing... right? Unless you like dead Arabs for the ideological reason for sticking it to Israel from a comfy safe home in Dublin..

]
Being hemmed in by settlers, reguarlirly attacked, beaten, and subject to skow drip ethnic cleansing is not a "good thing".

jank wrote: »

Nowhere did I mention however that things were sweet in the west bank garden which is where your last post comes in and I admit there are issues to be resolved there. Now of course you seem to think that being colonised seems to be a legitimate reason to launch terror attacks on civilian areas. You can clarify if you want.

Being colonised does indeed legitimise armed resistance, though civillians should not be targeted.

Icepick

Nodin wrote: »

Being colonised does indeed legitimise armed resistance, though civillians should not be targeted.

So why are they and why do you defend Hamas?

jank

Nodin wrote: »

Being hemmed in by settlers, reguarlirly attacked, beaten, and subject to skow drip ethnic cleansing is not a "good thing".

Again Nodin, I never said it was a good thing (its a favourite trick of yours), but its better than replicating Gaza which resembles a war zone. Not sure why you have to nitpick this very simple fundamental point.

Nodin wrote: »

Being colonised does indeed legitimise armed resistance, though civillians should not be targeted.

The thing is, civilians have been the primary target of Hamas, Fatah in the past and the PLO of old. Therefore by the reality of the situation by defacto, you admit it is not legitimate to launch rockets into civilian areas, build tunnels for the express purpose of murdering Israeli civilians and blow yourself up on buses or Tel-Aviv cafes.

Nodin

jank wrote: »

Again Nodin, I never said it was a good thing (its a favourite trick of yours), but its better than replicating Gaza which resembles a war zone. Not sure why you have to nitpick this very simple fundamental point. .

It's debatable whether or nor it is. Its possible to rebuild after an attack - land lost to a colony is almost certainly gone forever.

jank wrote: »

The thing is, civilians have been the primary target of Hamas, Fatah in the past and the PLO of old. Therefore by the reality of the situation by defacto, you admit it is not legitimate to launch rockets into civilian areas, build tunnels for the express purpose of murdering Israeli civilians and blow yourself up on buses or Tel-Aviv cafes.

Please don't lecture me as to what I do or do not admit.

For somebody who supposedly condemns the settlements, you seem rather fixated on the Palestinians.

Nodin

Icepick wrote: »

So why are they and why do you defend Hamas?

Because they have no guided long range weaponry. You'll note they took care of a number of IDF when they came close enough.

kylith

jank wrote: »

Again Nodin, I never said it was a good thing (its a favourite trick of yours), but its better than replicating Gaza which resembles a war zone. Not sure why you have to nitpick this very simple fundamental point.

It seems to me the difference between death all at once and death by inches.

jank wrote: »

The thing is, civilians have been the primary target of Hamas, Fatah in the past and the PLO of old. Therefore by the reality of the situation by defacto, you admit it is not legitimate to launch rockets into civilian areas, build tunnels for the express purpose of murdering Israeli civilians and blow yourself up on buses or Tel-Aviv cafes.

The Israelis have also been shown to deliberately target civilians, children, and hospitals. Neither side is blameless in this, so why do you seem to whitewash what the Israelis have done?