Israeli - Palestinian Conflict *Threadbans in OP*

Odhinn

Deleted User wrote: »

Those 5 million you are referring to are not part of Israel, nor do they want to be part of Israel. Interesting that you count them as Israeli subjects though when it suits.

You can criticise Israel all you want but it's still the number 1 country in the region in terms of democracy, human rights, free speech, science, religious tolerance and accountable government.

Israel governs that 5 million and gives them no say in the Israeli government. That makes your claim a nonsense/.

Igotadose

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Unless you're Palestinian, then you're treated less than human.

Yes, that's why Palestinians are represented in Knesset and were (nearly) in government in the last go-rounds of forming one. Oh, and have a vote, obviously.

namloc1980

Igotadose wrote: »

Yes, that's why Palestinians are represented in Knesset and were (nearly) in government in the last go-rounds of forming one. Oh, and have a vote, obviously.

What? Those are Israeli citizens of Palestinian origin. We're talking about about the nearly 5 million Palestinians living on the West Bank and Gaza who have no such representation or voting rights.

Igotadose

namloc1980 wrote: »

What? Those are Israeli citizens of Palestinian origin. We're talking about about the nearly 5 million Palestinians living on the West Bank and Gaza who have no such representation or voting rights.

How is giving Israeli citizens of Palestinian origin, treating Palestinians as 'less than human' as was in the original post? Surely they shouldn't have a vote if they're being treated as less than human?

thomas 123

Igotadose wrote: »

Yes, that's why Palestinians are represented in Knesset and were (nearly) in government in the last go-rounds of forming one. Oh, and have a vote, obviously.

Which parties?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knesset

namloc1980

namloc1980 wrote: »

What? Those are Israeli citizens of Palestinian origin. We're talking about about the nearly 5 million Palestinians living on the West Bank and Gaza who have no such representation or voting rights.

For them to have representation or voting rights Israel would have to annex Gaza and West Bank. Is that preferable?

It's like people in NI complaining that they have no representation or voting rights in the Republic.

namloc1980

Igotadose wrote: »

How is giving Israeli citizens of Palestinian origin, treating Palestinians as 'less than human' as was in the original post? Surely they shouldn't have a vote if they're being treated as less than human?

They are Israeli citizens!! What part of this do you not get? Or do you see some Israeli citizens as different to others??

Igotadose

thomas 123 wrote: »

Which parties?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knesset

Ra'am and the joint list. https://www.al-monitor.com/originals/2021/04/arab-parties-determine-israeli-government

thomas 123

Igotadose wrote: »

Yes, that's why Palestinians are represented in Knesset and were (nearly) in government in the last go-rounds of forming one. Oh, and have a vote, obviously.

Which parties?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knesset

namloc1980

Deleted User wrote: »

For them to have representation or voting rights Israel would have to annex Gaza and West Bank. Is that preferable?

It's like people in NI complaining that they have no representation or voting rights in the Republic.

No it's nothing like that. People living in Northern Ireland have representation, freedoms and full democratic rights. They are not hemmed into ghettos and open air prisons with little or no freedoms.

namloc1980

namloc1980 wrote: »

No it's nothing like that. People living in Northern Ireland have representation, freedoms and full democratic rights. They are not hemmed into ghettos and open air prisons with little or no freedoms.

I'm confused. You're complaining that 5m people in Gaza/West Bank don't have voting rights in Israel. They don't live in Israel. So why should they have voting rights in a country that they don't live in?

chewed

Deleted User wrote: »

Does Israel do bad things? Yes.

Is it still the best and most tolerant country in the region? Also - yes.

Please define "the best" for me.

namloc1980

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm confused. You're complaining that 5m people in Gaza/West Bank don't have voting rights in Israel. They don't live in Israel. So why should they have voting rights in a country that they don't live in?

You're confused because you and others claimed Israel is a shining beacon of humanity in the Middle East but seem to be pretty blasé about 5m people under Israeli rule who live in open air prisons with little or no freedoms.

I never once said they should have voting rights IN Israel - that's just a strawman you made up. Those people should however have the right to self determination and rights of their own and not be subject to a decades long military occupation. Do you not agree or are you happy to deny them these rights?

chewed

chewed wrote: »

Please define "the best" for me.

Free, democratic, tolerant and fair. They are also the best for free markets and science.

namloc1980

Deleted User wrote: »

Free, democratic, tolerant and fair. They are also the best for free markets and science.

To believe this you have to ignore the 5m people under Israeli military occupation who are treated like dirt.

thomas 123

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Free, democratic, tolerant and fair. They are also the best for free markets and science.

Only for one group of people though eh. Makes all of that very invalid.

thomas 123

namloc1980 wrote: »

To believe this you have to ignore the 5m people under Israeli military occupation who are treated like dirt.

Don’t forget those who live(just about) in the state of Israel(less Gaza and the West Bank).

Mimon

thomas 123 wrote: »

Only for one group of people though eh. Makes all of that very invalid.

Exactly, if you only judged the Apartheid regime in South Africa on how it treated white people you would say they were a great bunch of lads also.

end of the road

Deleted User wrote: »

Does Israel do bad things? Yes.

Is it still the best and most tolerant country in the region? Also - yes.

is it over all tolerant though? no, it isn't.

Deleted User wrote: »

For them to have representation or voting rights Israel would have to annex Gaza and West Bank. Is that preferable?

It's like people in NI complaining that they have no representation or voting rights in the Republic.

israel has already effectively annexed those areas.

Igotadose

thomas 123 wrote: »

Only for one group of people though eh. Makes all of that very invalid.

Who is blocked in Israel from voting, science, jobs....

end of the road

Igotadose wrote: »

O.K. so rockets forever right? Because when Israel withdrew in 2005 and let the Gazans decide their fate, they voted in Hamas and started launching rockets.

Which didn't happen in the West Bank, oddly enough.

the timeline was.
israel withdraw from gaza, people voted hamas, israel instated a blockade/siege, the firing of rockets began.
so as per usual, the rockets were a response to israel's aggression.

Igotadose wrote: »

Yes, that's why Palestinians are represented in Knesset and were (nearly) in government in the last go-rounds of forming one. Oh, and have a vote, obviously.

the new nation state law prohibits all non-jews from having rights.
before hand, certain groups including certain groups of jews didn't have rights either.

Igotadose

end of the road wrote: »

the timeline was.
israel withdraw from gaza, people voted hamas, israel instated a blockade/siege, the firing of rockets began.
so as per usual, the rockets were a response to israel's aggression.

Israel withdraws, the rockets started that day. Define what you mean by siege and what day it started on

the new nation state law prohibits all non-jews from having rights.
before hand, certain groups including certain groups of jews didn't have rights either.

Yes, Israeli policy is deserving of criticism, especially the nation-state garbage. As you point out, they're more-or-less equal opportunity bigots.

wes

Israeli government claims to have the most moral army in the world, and then gets pissed off, when people hold them to the standard, the Israeli government set for itself.

end of the road

Igotadose wrote: »

Israel withdraws, the rockets started that day. Define what you mean by siege and what day it started on

Yes, Israeli policy is deserving of criticism, especially the nation-state garbage. As you point out, they're more-or-less equal opportunity bigots.

i remember the withdrawel well and things happened exactly as i stated, which is the correct timeline.

paulaa

Deleted User wrote: »

Free, democratic, tolerant and fair. They are also the best for free markets and science.

I'm sorry but how can you say Israel is "democratic, tolerant and fair. " It can't be any of those things when the 5 million people, who are under their savage rule, have no freedom, no self determination, no peace of mind. You don't seem to even recognise that these people exist.

They are humiliated and whipped at every turn by Israeli troops who have been reared to see them as little more than animals. Anything they own is at risk of being taken by rabid settlers who are protected by the IDF.

Ben Dahan, responsible for the IDF’s Civil Administration running government affairs in the West Bank, made his opinion of the Palestinians and non Jews well known.
While discussing the resumption of peace talks in a radio interview Ben Dahan said that “To me, they are like animals, they aren’t human.”
“The Palestinians aren’t educated towards peace, nor to they want it,” he said.
He also said "Ben Dahan told Maariv that homosexual Jews were superior than gentiles — gay or straight.
“A Jew always has a much higher soul than a gentile, even if he is a homosexual,” he said.

Another Israeli minister, Ayelet Shaked, Israeli parliament member and law-maker, has stigmatized all Palestinians as terrorists, wishing death on all Palestinians while supporting the Israeli military assault.

"Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there."
"They have to die and their houses should be demolished so that they cannot bear any more terrorists," said Shaked. Standing behind the operations on Gaza, "they are all our enemies and their blood should be on our hands. This also applies to the mothers of the dead terrorists," Shaked added.

A day before Palestinian teenager Muhammad Abu Khudair was kidnapped and burned alive allegedly by six Israeli Jewish youths, Shaked published on Facebook a call for genocide of the Palestinians.

The posts were considered as a call for genocide because it declared that "the entire Palestinian people is the enemy" and justifies its destruction, "including its elderly and its women, its cities and its villages, its property and its infrastructure." she also called for the slaughter of Palestinian mothers who give birth to "little snakes."

Do you support these sentiments and the politicians who made them ?

Mimon

wes wrote: »

Israeli government claims to have the most moral army in the world, and then gets pissed off, when people hold them to the standard, the Israeli government set for itself.

Yep, the scumbag in an Israeli uniform attempting to throw a blast grenade at an injured people being loaded into and Ambulance last week is their actual level of morality.

Signore Fancy Pants

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Free, democratic, tolerant and fair. They are also the best for free markets and science.

Free?
In what sense?

Democratic?
Better then proximal countries but its debatable. They have a flawed democracy, in the sense that populism drives leadership to sustain fear in their population, in efforts to maintain political control. "Democracy" at its finest but self serving in reality...with consequences for Israelis.

Tolerant & Fair?
How many countries have Israel occupied by force? How is their human rights record? They marginalise Palestinians and have no time for Hisidic Jews.

Tolerant and fair, me hole. They are selectively tolerant.

What was the proximate cause of this wave of the conflict between Hamas and Israel?

Hamas issued an ultimatum to Israel: withdraw Israeli forces from Sheikh Jarrah and the Temple Mount or face imminent attacks.

The Hamas terror group threatened Israel with an ultimatum on Monday afternoon, saying all Israeli security forces had to be removed from the Temple Mount and the Sheikh Jarrah neighbourhood of East Jerusalem by 6 p.m., or else the so-called “joint operations room” — a body representing the various terror groups in the Strip — would attack.

In other words, the Israeli operation in Gaza would not have taken place had Hamas a) not issued this ultimatum and b) acted upon it when the 6pm deadline passed - firing hundreds of rockets onto Israeli territory. Hamas has no right to tell Israel what to do, let alone issue an ultimatum backed up by the threat of military action.

Israel had to respond, and respond she did.

This was an entirely preventable situation, but Hamas did their best to create the circumstances that led to the situation we now see.

People can ignore this reality and point the finger of blame at Israel if they choose, but to choose to do so is to ignore the proximate casus belli of this wave of the conflict.

Donald Trump

eskimohunt wrote: »

What was the proximate cause of this wave of the conflict between Hamas and Israel?

Hamas issued an ultimatum to Israel: withdraw Israeli forces from Sheikh Jarrah and the Temple Mount or face imminent attacks.



In other words, the Israeli operation in Gaza would not have taken place had Hamas a) not issued this ultimatum and b) acted upon it when the 6pm deadline passed - firing hundreds of rockets onto Israeli territory. Hamas has no right to tell Israel what to do, let alone issue an ultimatum backed up by the threat of military action.

Israel had to respond, and respond she did.

This was an entirely preventable situation, but Hamas did their best to create the circumstances that led to the situation we now see.

People can ignore this reality and point the finger of blame at Israel if they choose, but to choose to do so is to ignore the proximate casus belli of this wave of the conflict.

Sure I might rant out an oul' ultimatum for Israel out on boards.ie. It wouldn't mean that Israel would be justified in sending over a few missiles targetting Temple St Children's hospital

paulaa

eskimohunt wrote: »

What was the proximate cause of this wave of the conflict between Hamas and Israel?

Hamas issued an ultimatum to Israel: withdraw Israeli forces from Sheikh Jarrah and the Temple Mount or face imminent attacks.



In other words, the Israeli operation in Gaza would not have taken place had Hamas a) not issued this ultimatum and b) acted upon it when the 6pm deadline passed - firing hundreds of rockets onto Israeli territory. Hamas has no right to tell Israel what to do, let alone issue an ultimatum backed up by the threat of military action.

Israel had to respond, and respond she did.

This was an entirely preventable situation, but Hamas did their best to create the circumstances that led to the situation we now see.

People can ignore this reality and point the finger of blame at Israel if they choose, but to choose to do so is to ignore the proximate casus belli of this wave of the conflict.

This was going to happen anyway. Hamas statement was just the excuse Netanyahu needed because he was losing politically. To say otherwise is to show a lack of knowledge about Netanyahu's desperation to hold onto power at any cost and to keep himself out of jail . It's not the first time he has done this to save himself

People all over the world are concerned about the threatened evictions and land grab in Sheikh Jarrah. The UN are talking about it as we speak .