Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Standard member spruce112358
    Democracy Advocate
    29 Nov '12 16:31
    Will be recognized by the nations of the world at the UN General Assembly today by a democratic majority. This is a landmark occasion. Palestinians have long been denied their democratic rights, and this vote marks an important step forward in the quest to resolve one of the world's great injustices of the last 60 years.

    In other news, one of the world's greatest democracies, The United States of America, the so called "Arsenal of Democracy", a nation with a long history of promoting democracy, defending democracy, and of shedding blood to liberate conquered democracies will PETULANTLY THROW A HISSY FIT, stomp its feet, whine, and throw itself on the floor screaming, "But we don't LIKE those people!!!!"
  2. Standard member sasquatch672
    Don't Like It Leave
    29 Nov '12 16:35
    Originally posted by spruce112358
    Will be recognized by the nations of the world at the UN General Assembly today by a democratic majority. This is a landmark occasion. Palestinians have long been denied their democratic rights, and this vote marks an important step forward in the quest to resolve one of the world's great injustices of the last 60 years.

    In other news, one of the wor ...[text shortened]... eet, whine, and throw itself on the floor screaming, "But we don't LIKE those people!!!!"
    I don't know, maybe they reacted that way because, oh, the government of Palestine is a terrorist government...
  3. 29 Nov '12 16:37
    A gesture which will have purely symbolic value. A Palestinian state will not be established in the near future because they keep electing warmongers in Israel and Hamas is not really interested in peace because they don't have access to serious talks anyway. Fatah would probably be prepared for some concessions but they are weak, corrupt and have no power in Gaza.
  4. 29 Nov '12 16:54
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    A gesture which will have purely symbolic value.
    Symbolism is a large part of government and what makes a country a country.
  5. Standard member spruce112358
    Democracy Advocate
    29 Nov '12 18:05
    Originally posted by sasquatch672
    I don't know, maybe they reacted that way because, oh, the government of Palestine is a terrorist government...
    Did you beat your children and lock them in their rooms their whole life and then wonder why they didn't love you?

    If so, then I understand (without condoning) your point of view.
  6. Standard member sasquatch672
    Don't Like It Leave
    29 Nov '12 18:15
    Originally posted by spruce112358
    Did you beat your children and lock them in their rooms their whole life and then wonder why they didn't love you?

    If so, then I understand (without condoning) your point of view.
    Come on. That's a gross oversimplification and you know it.
  7. Standard member spruce112358
    Democracy Advocate
    29 Nov '12 18:24
    Originally posted by sasquatch672
    Come on. That's a gross oversimplification and you know it.
    I know, you only deprived your children of food and toys -- you didn't beat them that much. But you have kept them locked them in their room since 2006.

    And where do they get those bottle rockets? They keep shooting them out the (barred) windows when you try to mow the yard. Infuriating! They never hit you of course -- well, one time they hit you on the leg and burned your favorite work pants.

    So you shake your fist at them, call them terrorists, and tell them that they will stay in their rooms FOREVER until they stop shooting rockets.

    Kids never respect their parents. Go figure.
  8. 29 Nov '12 18:26
    Originally posted by spruce112358
    I know, you only deprived your children of food and toys -- you didn't beat them that much. But you have kept them locked them in their room since 2006.

    And where do they get those bottle rockets? They keep shooting them out the (barred) windows when you try to mow the yard. Infuriating! They never hit you of course -- well, one time they hit you on ...[text shortened]... rooms FOREVER until they stop shooting rockets.

    Kids never respect their parents. Go figure.
    When did you stop beating your dog?
  9. Standard member sasquatch672
    Don't Like It Leave
    29 Nov '12 18:37
    Originally posted by spruce112358
    I know, you only deprived your children of food and toys -- you didn't beat them that much. But you have kept them locked them in their room since 2006.

    And where do they get those bottle rockets? They keep shooting them out the (barred) windows when you try to mow the yard. Infuriating! They never hit you of course -- well, one time they hit you on ...[text shortened]... rooms FOREVER until they stop shooting rockets.

    Kids never respect their parents. Go figure.
    You're forgetting that Iran uses Palestine to fight a proxy war via Hamas and Hezbollah. Your argument is not really that Israel is good at the military, and Palestine is just a harmless lapdog that occasionally, playfully, endearingly nips at Israel's ankles - is it?

    Hamas does not act responsibly. That they provide social services to Palenstinians does not mean that they get to lob rockets into Israel for free. Hamas actually buys Palestinian loyalty with those services, and extorts it through fear...you do recall the Palestinian who was executed and dragged through the streets behind a motorcycle a few weeks back?

    I do not paint all Palestinians with the same broad brush, and I certainly understand how they feel wronged by being thrown off their land in 1947. That is certainly a legitimate point. But Clinton had Israel and Palestine tantalizingly close to a deal for lasting peace, and the Palestinian government scuttled that opportunity with new attacks.

    Obama does not have the stature of Clinton in the Arab world (remember, he bows to Muslim kings), and certainly does not have it in Israel. His treatment of Netanyahu, who is rightfully very wary of Iran, has ensured that.
  10. Standard member spruce112358
    Democracy Advocate
    29 Nov '12 18:50 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by sasquatch672
    You're forgetting that Iran uses Palestine to fight a proxy war via Hamas and Hezbollah. Your argument is not really that Israel is good at the military, and Palestine is just a harmless lapdog that occasionally, playfully, endearingly nips at Israel's ankles - is it?

    Hamas does not act responsibly. That they provide social services to Palenstini ...[text shortened]... in Israel. His treatment of Netanyahu, who is rightfully very wary of Iran, has ensured that.
    Didn't...I don't know, let me just pick a nation out of the air...FRANCE. Didn't France ever fight a proxy war against the -- let's see, ENGLISH lets say -- using...using..using -- oh, whomever -- the AMERICANS.

    If something that outrageous had even happened, wouldn't that be intolerable? I mean a proxy war --- REALLY? Wouldn't it make you just want to call the Americans "terrorists" and put sanctions on the French FOREVER?!? That or just send in countless airstrikes, I don't know. Something.
  11. 29 Nov '12 18:56
    Originally posted by sasquatch672
    I don't know, maybe they reacted that way because, oh, the government
    of Palestine is a terrorist government...
    "The government of Palestine is a terrorist government."
    --Sasquatch672

    Which 'government of Palestine'? The Palestinians have two governments,
    which tend to be at odds with each other. The West Bank's governed by the
    Palestinian Authority (led by Mahmoud Abbas), which long has attempted to
    pursue peace talks with Israel, only to find out that Israel prefers to stall
    while building even more Jewish settlements. Most Palestinians have begun
    to conclude that a purely 'peace talk' approach has not worked for them.

    As for Hamas, it was elected by most people in Gaza to represent them.
    Please note that most people in Israel have elected Prime Ministers such as
    Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir, who had long records of terrorism.
    Begin ordered the bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, killing 91 people.
    While he was not there, Begin also evidently bears responsibility for the Zionist
    forces' (Irgun and Lehi) massacre of the Palestinian village at Deir Yassin.
    Shamir planned the assassinations of the UK's Lord Moyne and Sweden's
    Count Folke Bernadotte, who was representing the United Nations.

    It's hypocritical for supporters of Israel to condemn the Palestinians in Gaza
    for electing 'terrorists' to represent them when the people of Israel have elected
    Prime Ministers such as Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir. The Israelis
    should attempt to respect the 'democratic choices' of the Palestinians as much
    as the Palestinians have respected the 'democratic choices' of the Israelis.

    Moreover, please note that the United States also used to condemn some
    black South African organizations as 'terrorists' when they were fighting against
    apartheid. Contrary to the now popular sanitized views of the anti-apartheid
    struggle that seem presented in the US media, the struggle against apartheid
    was not always non-violent, and I doubt that it would have succeeded, at least
    as soon as it did, if the anti-apartheid black South African organizations always
    had rejected the path of armed struggle. South Africa's apartheid government
    liked to denounce the African National Congress (ANC) and Nelson Mandela as
    'terrorist' on account of some bombings that killed white South African civilians.
    If ANC had the same weapons as Hamas, would the ANC never have used them?

    The history of national resistance movements against imperialism shows that
    many leaders who were denounced as 'terrorists' (e.g. Michael Collins, Jomo
    Kenyatta, Nelson Mandela) later have become accepted as 'responsible statesmen'.
    Why could that not become true someday for a Hamas leader as well?
  12. Standard member spruce112358
    Democracy Advocate
    29 Nov '12 19:09
    Originally posted by sasquatch672
    You're forgetting that Iran uses Palestine to fight a proxy war via Hamas and Hezbollah. Your argument is not really that Israel is good at the military, and Palestine is just a harmless lapdog that occasionally, playfully, endearingly nips at Israel's ankles - is it?

    Hamas does not act responsibly. That they provide social services to Palenstini ...[text shortened]... in Israel. His treatment of Netanyahu, who is rightfully very wary of Iran, has ensured that.
    The Palestinians do feel wronged as a result of 1947. They were essentially a British colony at that time (British 'mandate'. Once the Brits made plans to leave, the Arabs figured to rule themselves.

    But then came all these Russians and Poles fleeing war-torn Europe! What started as a trickle became a flood, and the Brits did nothing to stop it. Plus, a lot of the Poles had fought with the British against the Axis (see Ander's Army; Menachem Begin), so when they decided to take over the country, they had the arms and training.

    So off you go, Arabs, off into refugee camps. And there a lot of them still sit.

    You are right, the Palestinians do feel wronged.
  13. 29 Nov '12 19:09 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by sasquatch672 to spruce112358
    You're forgetting that Iran uses Palestine to fight a proxy war via Hamas and Hezbollah. Your argument is not really that Israel is good at the military, and Palestine is just a harmless lapdog that occasionally, playfully, endearingly nips at Israel's ankles - is it?

    Hamas does not act responsibly. That they provide social servic ...[text shortened]... in Israel. His treatment of Netanyahu, who is rightfully very wary of Iran, has ensured that.
    "Iran uses Palestine to fight a proxy war via Hamas and Hezbollah."
    --Sasquatch672

    "Iran uses Palestine to fight a proxy war via...Hezbollah?"
    Don't you know that Hezbollah's a Lebanese Shiite group that usually fights
    Israel whenever Israel invades Lebanon? As far as I know, Hezbollah has
    not recruited any members from the Palestinian refugees in Lebanon.

    Also, it's untrue now that Hamas (an Arab Sunni group) is a 'proxy' for Iran
    (a nation mostly of Persian Shiites). An alliance between Arab Sunnis and
    Persian Shiites was one of expedience at best, not of natural affection.
    For a while now, Hamas has turned to Qatar, not Iran, as its chief patron.
    Please don't ignore the significance of the Sunni-Shiite division in the region.

    Moreover, as I already have written elsewhere, Israel has not always been
    absolutely opposed to Hamas. In the 1980s Israel covertly encouraged Hamas
    to become more powerful in an attempt (successful in the short term) to create
    conflict between Hamas and the PLO and division in the Palestinian opposition to
    Israel. So it's historically untrue to claim that Israel always has regarded Hamas
    as its most dangerous enemy among the Palestinians.
  14. Standard member sasquatch672
    Don't Like It Leave
    29 Nov '12 19:23
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    "The government of Palestine is a terrorist government."
    --Sasquatch672

    Which 'government of Palestine'? The Palestinians have two governments,
    which tend to be at odds with each other. The West Bank's governed by the
    Palestinian Authority (led by Mahmoud Abbas), which long has attempted to
    pursue peace talks with Israel, only to find out that Is ...[text shortened]... '.
    Why could that not become true someday for a Hamas leader as well?
    Duchess, a very thoughtful post, to be sure. I simply don't believe the Palestinians are negotiating in good faith. I don't see anyone in their government acting with any faith in diplomacy. I also think that Israel is dealing with an element in government that is unique in human history. Certainly, there is a faction of the Palestinian government that would do a peace deal. I don't know who comprises that faction, but I'm sure it's there. However, there is also an element - and I believe this element to enjoy supremacy in the Palestinian leadership - that is working for the outright destruction of Israel and will dedicate their lives and deaths to achieving that aim.

    This has a chilling effect on any negotiations that the calmer heads on both sides of the debate might be willing to undertake. Those who would negotiate in good faith on the Palestinian side are marginalized at best, intimidated and branded as traitors in the main, and executed at worst. Israel, for its part, rightfully believes that negotiation with this element is impossible.

    Revolution and fights for independence and self-governance are nearly always violent. I understand your comparison of the Palestinian effort with other efforts in history, but again, there is an element in the Palestinian leadership that wishes far worse for Israel than to be free from it.
  15. 29 Nov '12 20:11
    Originally posted by spruce112358 to sasquatch672
    The Palestinians do feel wronged as a result of 1947. They were essentially a British colony at that time (British 'mandate'. Once the Brits made plans to leave, the Arabs figured to rule themselves.

    But then came all these Russians and Poles fleeing war-torn Europe! What started as a trickle became a flood, and the Brits did nothing ...[text shortened]... camps. And there a lot of them still sit.

    You are right, the Palestinians do feel wronged.
    "You are right, the Palestinians do feel wronged."
    --Spruce112358

    I can recall meeting a Palestinian who still has his family's British legal documents
    (from before the state of Israel) establishing title to their land and house in what
    now has become a part of Israel. He still keeps that house's key as a reminder.
    He said that he could begin to consider forgiving Israel *if* Israel would ever
    sincerely acknowledge that Zionism was responsible for a profound injustice
    against the Palestinians. But Israel's unwilling to admit that because that would
    seem to undermine the moral legitimacy of the Zionist colonial enterprise.
    What most Palestinians need, before all else, is simply for Israel to apologise
    *sincerely* for its historical wronging of the Palestinians. Then negotiations
    can begin about what should be done to address *in part* that wrongdoing.

    There's an Israeli propaganda myth, which still seems to have some circulation
    in the US media (which hardly ever questions any Israeli propaganda myths) that
    Arab radio broadcasts encouraged, or even ordered, the Palestinians to leave
    their homes 'voluntarily' and await the supposedly victorious Arab armies in 1948.
    This Israeli propaganda myth has long been discredited except among the
    ignorant and gullible (such as too many Americans). Around the time of the
    1948 Arab-Israeli War, the British took care to monitor Arab radio broadcasts
    and keep track of them. In the 1950s, Erskine Childers (an Irishman) looked
    hard for any evidence of these Arab radio broadcasts and could find none,
    even though some Israelis blithely promised to bring such evidence to him.
    So Erskine Childers (and others) concluded that the 'Arab radio broadcasts'
    excuse was another fabrication of Israeli propaganda. A fuller discussion
    may be found in a chapter of Blaming the Victims: Spurious Scholarship and
    the Palestinian Question (edited by Edward Said and Christopher Hitchens).

    http://www.users.cloud9.net/~recross/israel-watch/ErskinChilders.html

    Even if it were true that most Palestinians 'voluntarily' had left their homes
    *temporarily* in wartime, that should *not* mean under international law that
    the Palestinians were 'voluntarily' forsaking their right to return to their homes
    and to reclaim their land and property. In wartime, it's common for refugees
    to leave their homes, usually out of their understandable fear of violence.
    In this case, however, Israel and the Zionists long have claimed that, by leaving
    at all, the Palestinian refugees have forever lost their right to return and their
    rights to their land and property, which then could be 'rightfully' given to (largely)
    Jews who had recently arrived from Europe.

    An objection that I have against Zionism is this: On one hand, Zionists like to
    claim that, simply because in Biblical times some Jews had lived there, in the
    20th century other Jews should have the right to claim Palestine as a national
    Jewish homeland. (As Shlomo Sand has pointed out, it's quite a stretch to
    argue that the Jews of Biblical times are the 'same people' as the Jews of the
    20th century.) But, on the other hand, if a Palestinian, who might still have the
    British legal documents giving him title to his land, had left during the 1948 war,
    he should have no right to return to his home after the war had ended, simply
    because he's not a Jew. In contrast, someone who had converted to Judaism
    yesterday could enjoy, by Israel's Law of Return, 'returning to his homeland'.