Europe submits voluntarily

[untermensche]

To oppose Israeli crimes is not to wish any harm to the citizens of Israel.

Nor is it to support violence from the people being violently oppressed.

It is just to oppose Israeli crimes.

 

[repoman]

maybe not so voluntarily:

 

[whichphilosophy]

maybe not so voluntarily:

Could this be Islamophobia vs our leaders' Islamophilia? Of course neither are desirable. The lady there is the deputy leader of the Britain First Party. Their videos are good for entertainment purposes.

 

[angelo]

To oppose Israeli crimes is not to wish any harm to the citizens of Israel.

Nor is it to support violence from the people being violently oppressed.

It is just to oppose Israeli crimes.

While completely ignoring terrorists acts. There, fixed it for you!

 

[DrZoidberg]

There should be a variant of Godwin's law. Some sort of law of transformation. Any thread on politics, if it continues long enough, will eventually transform into a discussion about the Israel/Palestine conflict.

It's a huge gaping wound and a cause of a lot of trouble.

And since it is happening with US support it is a US issue.

I don't question that there's a huge gaping hole. I'm wondering why the size of that hole is so out of proportion? And why the rest of the world is supposed to care as much as we are? I can think of a whole bag of conflicts since 1948 that that are as serious and complex as the Israel-Palestine conflict. Yet, we don't give many fucks. We just keep coming back to this run-of-the-mill festering mess. I'm just asking why? Israel is a tiny speck of a nation. It's roughly the size of Sweden. Who cares this fucking much? Yes, it's a mess. But I care less about this conflict than the conflict in Sudan, Rwanda, ex-Yugoslavia, Ukraine, Uigur conflict in China, Hong Kong's democracy issues, Internet censorship, Arab Spring's aftermath, South Africa's continual slide into dysfunction, Zimbabwe, Boko Haram, Al-Qaeda vs the world, Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia, the endless Somalia bullshit, Al-Shabaab, Greece's economic woes, the rise of nationalism in Europe and the topic of this thread. And that's just off the top of my head. I'm sure I've forgotten hundreds, if not thousands, of contenders as a bigger bag of mess than this conflict.

And here's the clincher, there's been nothing new to Israel/Palestine conflict in the last 50 years. It's the same bullshit as in 1948. There's two highly nationalistic and chauvinistic groups squabbling over the same plot of land and they are seemingly unable to respect each other. Which needs to happen before any negotiation is meaningful. As long as this situation remains the same, I don't know what there is to discuss? To quote my Hungarian-Israeli (and Jewish) ex-wife when I asked her what she thinks of the conflict. Her answer was "the Palestinians and Israelis deserve each other".

Why do you care so fucking much?

 

[whichphilosophy]

It's a huge gaping wound and a cause of a lot of trouble.

And since it is happening with US support it is a US issue.

I don't question that there's a huge gaping hole. I'm wondering why the size of that hole is so out of proportion? And why the rest of the world is supposed to care as much as we are? I can think of a whole bag of conflicts since 1948 that that are as serious and complex as the Israel-Palestine conflict. Yet, we don't give many fucks. We just keep coming back to this run-of-the-mill festering mess. I'm just asking why? Israel is a tiny speck of a nation. It's roughly the size of Sweden. Who cares this fucking much? Yes, it's a mess. But I care less about this conflict than the conflict in Sudan, Rwanda, ex-Yugoslavia, Ukraine, Uigur conflict in China, Hong Kong's democracy issues, Internet censorship, Arab Spring's aftermath, South Africa's continual slide into dysfunction, Zimbabwe, Boko Haram, Al-Qaeda vs the world, Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia, the endless Somalia bullshit, Al-Shabaab, Greece's economic woes, the rise of nationalism in Europe and the topic of this thread. And that's just off the top of my head. I'm sure I've forgotten hundreds, if not thousands, of contenders as a bigger bag of mess than this conflict.

And here's the clincher, there's been nothing new to Israel/Palestine conflict in the last 50 years. It's the same bullshit as in 1948. There's two highly nationalistic and chauvinistic groups squabbling over the same plot of land and they are seemingly unable to respect each other. Which needs to happen before any negotiation is meaningful. As long as this situation remains the same, I don't know what there is to discuss? To quote my Hungarian-Israeli (and Jewish) ex-wife when I asked her what she thinks of the conflict. Her answer was "the Palestinians and Israelis deserve each other".

Why do you care so fucking much?

Israel at peace with its neighbours and especially the Palestinians would generate an unprecedented in tourism and property purchasing from rich Christians, Arabs and Jews to retire. The place would be booming and anyone could live where they wanted provided they had an extra million or so dollars for a house.

 

[bilby]

There should be a variant of Godwin's law. Some sort of law of transformation. Any thread on politics, if it continues long enough, will eventually transform into a discussion about the Israel/Palestine conflict.

It's a huge gaping wound and a cause of a lot of trouble.

And since it is happening with US support it is a US issue.

If the US didn't care, then few people outside the region would care.

Far worse things are happening in sub-Saharan Africa; but they are not newsworthy in the USA, because Americans have never heard of any of the places where these other conflicts are raging.

Israel/Palestine is, in terms of the number of people displaced, suffering or dying, a long way down the list of the world's huge gaping wounds.

But the fates of most African tribes, factions and nation states don't influence enough US Electoral College votes to get our attention.

 

[whichphilosophy]

It's a huge gaping wound and a cause of a lot of trouble.

And since it is happening with US support it is a US issue.

If the US didn't care, then few people outside the region would care.

Far worse things are happening in sub-Saharan Africa; but they are not newsworthy in the USA, because Americans have never heard of any of the places where these other conflicts are raging.

Israel/Palestine is, in terms of the number of people displaced, suffering or dying, a long way down the list of the world's huge gaping wounds.

But the fates of most African tribes, factions and nation states don't influence enough US Electoral College votes to get our attention.

The point is, when we intervene things get a lot worse. It's about time the Africans sort out their own problems. All the African countries are losing valuable educated skilled to Europe, the brain drain of which makes things worse.

 

[DrZoidberg]

If the US didn't care, then few people outside the region would care.

Far worse things are happening in sub-Saharan Africa; but they are not newsworthy in the USA, because Americans have never heard of any of the places where these other conflicts are raging.

Israel/Palestine is, in terms of the number of people displaced, suffering or dying, a long way down the list of the world's huge gaping wounds.

But the fates of most African tribes, factions and nation states don't influence enough US Electoral College votes to get our attention.

The point is, when we intervene things get a lot worse. It's about time the Africans sort out their own problems. All the African countries are losing valuable educated skilled to Europe, the brain drain of which makes things worse.

I don't agree. There's some sort of assumption here that we know what would have happened if the outside world wouldn't have meddled. If the world community wouldn't have meddled we'd still have apartheid in South Africa, Burma would still be a dictatorship, Kuwait would be a provins of Saddam's Iraq, the Taleban would rule Afghanistan and so on and so forth.

The fact that things might have gone better than they actually did isn't an argument against meddling. I don't know about you, but I think the world is probably a better place when dictators know that they're eventually likely to be held accountable for their actions.

 

[whichphilosophy]

The point is, when we intervene things get a lot worse. It's about time the Africans sort out their own problems. All the African countries are losing valuable educated skilled to Europe, the brain drain of which makes things worse.

I don't agree. There's some sort of assumption here that we know what would have happened if the outside world wouldn't have meddled. If the world community wouldn't have meddled we'd still have apartheid in South Africa, Burma would still be a dictatorship, Kuwait would be a provins of Saddam's Iraq, the Taleban would rule Afghanistan and so on and so forth.

The fact that things might have gone better than they actually did isn't an argument against meddling. I don't know about you, but I think the world is probably a better place when dictators know that they're eventually likely to be held accountable for their actions.

South Africa now exercises apartheid against 'white farmers' with a steady death rate since the 1990s (similar to Zimbabwe). We didn't invade Burma, Iraq is worse off before and Taliban type laws and courts are still rampant in Afghanistan. Added to this Libya and Syria are worse off. Libya once had the highest standard of living in North Africa. Christians and other minorities which were protected by Syria and Iraq are now being wipe

d out. Old Assyrian buildings have been wrecked by extremists. The death toll in Iraq alone could be millions where the second war was for WMDs, but all Iraq had were weapons which the West supplied to it. Anyway what was wrong with the Kuwaitis being caught with their pants down. This I hope taught them a lesson. When we removed these regimes the extremists filled the void

 

[DrZoidberg]

I don't agree. There's some sort of assumption here that we know what would have happened if the outside world wouldn't have meddled. If the world community wouldn't have meddled we'd still have apartheid in South Africa, Burma would still be a dictatorship, Kuwait would be a provins of Saddam's Iraq, the Taleban would rule Afghanistan and so on and so forth.

The fact that things might have gone better than they actually did isn't an argument against meddling. I don't know about you, but I think the world is probably a better place when dictators know that they're eventually likely to be held accountable for their actions.

South Africa now exercises apartheid against 'white farmers' with a steady death rate since the 1990s (similar to Zimbabwe). We didn't invade Burma, Iraq is worse off before and Taliban type laws and courts are still rampant in Afghanistan. Added to this Libya and Syria are worse off. Libya once had the highest standard of living in North Africa. Christians and other minorities which were protected by Syria and Iraq are now being wipe

d out. Old Assyrian buildings have been wrecked by extremists. The death toll in Iraq alone could be millions where the second war was for WMDs, but all Iraq had were weapons which the West supplied to it. Anyway what was wrong with the Kuwaitis being caught with their pants down. This I hope taught them a lesson. When we removed these regimes the extremists filled the void

Ehe... we didn't invade Burma. But foreign diplomatic pressure is what broke the regimes resistance. Without outside help Aung San Suu Kyi would not have had any pull. She'd be shot a long time ago.

What apartheid against white South African farmers? Are you talking about the decision to force them to hand in most of their guns? As far as I'm aware pretty much all land in South Africa is still owned and run by white South Africans. Just allowing them to keep this land is being super super nice to the white farmers. Considering how the white farms acquired this land historically. So I can't see how your argument holds.

Yes, Iraq is worse off now, but whose to say the same shit wouldn't have happened when Saddam's regime inevitably fell? The mess in Syria now is worse than Iraq ever was in the aftermath of the war. Any transition of government is going to hurt.

Are you blaming ISIS' sales of Babylonian antiques on western meddling?

 

[whichphilosophy]

South Africa now exercises apartheid against 'white farmers' with a steady death rate since the 1990s (similar to Zimbabwe). We didn't invade Burma, Iraq is worse off before and Taliban type laws and courts are still rampant in Afghanistan. Added to this Libya and Syria are worse off. Libya once had the highest standard of living in North Africa. Christians and other minorities which were protected by Syria and Iraq are now being wipe

d out. Old Assyrian buildings have been wrecked by extremists. The death toll in Iraq alone could be millions where the second war was for WMDs, but all Iraq had were weapons which the West supplied to it. Anyway what was wrong with the Kuwaitis being caught with their pants down. This I hope taught them a lesson. When we removed these regimes the extremists filled the void

Ehe... we didn't invade Burma. But foreign diplomatic pressure is what broke the regimes resistance. Without outside help Aung San Suu Kyi would not have had any pull. She'd be shot a long time ago.

What apartheid against white South African farmers? Are you talking about the decision to force them to hand in most of their guns? As far as I'm aware pretty much all land in South Africa is still owned and run by white South Africans. Just allowing them to keep this land is being super super nice to the white farmers. Considering how the white farms acquired this land historically. So I can't see how your argument holds.

Yes, Iraq is worse off now, but whose to say the same shit wouldn't have happened when Saddam's regime inevitably fell? The mess in Syria now is worse than Iraq ever was in the aftermath of the war. Any transition of government is going to hurt.

Are you blaming ISIS' sales of Babylonian antiques on western meddling?

Correct there was no invasion of Burma which is correct. The problem in South Africa though not mentioned much are the killings of White farmers where now some are now leaving. Not because they are white, but they are aware of how to run the farms. In Zimbabwe the take over of white farms proved to be a disaster. Farming isn't easy so many of these were simply neglected, resulting in a sharp impact on its farming production. Saddam like it or not was set to last quite a few years but either way the purpose for invading Iraq was Weapons of Mass Destruction which didn't exist. The best option for Syria is to restore power to an interim government if Assad agrees. Russians are currently broking a peace deal between the army and rebels. However it is hoped that the factions could restore peace also with the Kurds to drive out ISIS.

 

[whichphilosophy]

It appears that Sweden may at last expel failed asylum seekers per this report here but this would take several years, so perhaps in reality few will actually be repatriated.

However in Europe the word may in such circumstances also means maybe not. I believe a substantial amount may eventually be repatriated.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/sweden-expel-80-000-migrants-015149730.html

Here is an interesting point, where I have been mentioning a lack of security, which we can see has reduced the number of migrants

The number of migrant arrivals has dropped sharply since it brought in systematic photo ID checks for travellers earlier this month.

But the media report still seems to be blaming the Swedish authorities for a murder of one of its care workers, for which a teenage migrant was charged.


See

The number of migrant arrivals has dropped sharply since it brought in systematic photo ID checks for travellers earlier this month.

The announcement comes after a teenage asylum seeker was arrested on suspicion of murdering a female employee at a youth refugee centre in Molndal, near Gothenburg, earlier this week.

A motive for the stabbing attack was not clear, but her death has led to questions about overcrowded conditions in some centres, with too few adults and employees to look after children, many traumatised by war.

Traumatized is still used as justification for any acts of violence and breaking the law. Perhaps the court may apply the law in sentencing after a fair trial.
Perhaps the insistence of ID checks will reduce the proportion of crimes.

 

[angelo]

In other words, humanity has evolved into a warlike species which is headed for extinction.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Ehe... we didn't invade Burma. But foreign diplomatic pressure is what broke the regimes resistance. Without outside help Aung San Suu Kyi would not have had any pull. She'd be shot a long time ago.

What apartheid against white South African farmers? Are you talking about the decision to force them to hand in most of their guns? As far as I'm aware pretty much all land in South Africa is still owned and run by white South Africans. Just allowing them to keep this land is being super super nice to the white farmers. Considering how the white farms acquired this land historically. So I can't see how your argument holds.

Yes, Iraq is worse off now, but whose to say the same shit wouldn't have happened when Saddam's regime inevitably fell? The mess in Syria now is worse than Iraq ever was in the aftermath of the war. Any transition of government is going to hurt.

Are you blaming ISIS' sales of Babylonian antiques on western meddling?

Correct there was no invasion of Burma which is correct. The problem in South Africa though not mentioned much are the killings of White farmers where now some are now leaving. Not because they are white, but they are aware of how to run the farms. In Zimbabwe the take over of white farms proved to be a disaster. Farming isn't easy so many of these were simply neglected, resulting in a sharp impact on its farming production. Saddam like it or not was set to last quite a few years but either way the purpose for invading Iraq was Weapons of Mass Destruction which didn't exist. The best option for Syria is to restore power to an interim government if Assad agrees. Russians are currently broking a peace deal between the army and rebels. However it is hoped that the factions could restore peace also with the Kurds to drive out ISIS.

I think you're simplifying the white farmer thing in Zimbabwe as well as the white farmer thing in South Africa. The problem is that a free market tends to ossify class differences. For example, black Americans were set free from slavery in 1865. That's over 150 years ago. The average black American still makes 40% less than the average white American. Unless you fall back on race theory they'll just need to figure out a way to even that race gap out. Assuming you give a shit about equal opportunity, equality in general, justice and all of that stuff which the American constitution claims to hold as sacred. This is the bind that South Africa is in. The major difference between blacks in South Africa and blacks in USA is that the blacks are in a majority in South Africa. They have every reason to demand and expect speedier social transformation than American blacks have had to accept.

That bit about Syria is a derail (I think) and we already have separate threads for that.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Correct there was no invasion of Burma which is correct. The problem in South Africa though not mentioned much are the killings of White farmers where now some are now leaving. Not because they are white, but they are aware of how to run the farms. In Zimbabwe the take over of white farms proved to be a disaster. Farming isn't easy so many of these were simply neglected, resulting in a sharp impact on its farming production. Saddam like it or not was set to last quite a few years but either way the purpose for invading Iraq was Weapons of Mass Destruction which didn't exist. The best option for Syria is to restore power to an interim government if Assad agrees. Russians are currently broking a peace deal between the army and rebels. However it is hoped that the factions could restore peace also with the Kurds to drive out ISIS.

I think you're simplifying the white farmer thing in Zimbabwe as well as the white farmer thing in South Africa. The problem is that a free market tends to ossify class differences. For example, black Americans were set free from slavery in 1865. That's over 150 years ago. The average black American still makes 40% less than the average white American. Unless you fall back on race theory they'll just need to figure out a way to even that race gap out. Assuming you give a shit about equal opportunity, equality in general, justice and all of that stuff which the American constitution claims to hold as sacred. This is the bind that South Africa is in. The major difference between blacks in South Africa and blacks in USA is that the blacks are in a majority in South Africa. They have every reason to demand and expect speedier social transformation than American blacks have had to accept.

That bit about Syria is a derail (I think) and we already have separate threads for that.

http://www.rense.com/general67/drmr.htm
South Africa is considering expropriating a percentage White farms. The report suggests high sale prices and difficulties so far. In Zimbabwe the seizure of white farms proved to be a disaster.

Meanwhile Zimbabwe is considering inviting some farmers back after land grabs 15 years ago as this proved disasterous.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/africa/72074638/Zimbabwes-white-farmers-invited-back-after-land-grab. The race theory as to why blacks don't earn as much as whites in the USA is somewhat out of date. Some black people have achieved a lot as lawyers, doctors and engineers. It means more have to. Equal opportunity should be parallel with equal rights and the democratic procedure.

 

[whichphilosophy]

In other words, humanity has evolved into a warlike species which is headed for extinction.

The problem is some countries are refusing to take their migrants back. Merkel is facing this with Morocco, Algeria and other countries. Since Sweden introduced security measure such as ID checks the number of migrants has dropped. With such a volume being driven in by the politicians of Europe without any security checks then some criminals are very likely to use this route to greater pickings. As for Sweden, I believe in reality a fraction of those destined for deportation will actually leave.

 

[angelo]

It appears that Sweden may at last expel failed asylum seekers per this report here but this would take several years, so perhaps in reality few will actually be repatriated.

However in Europe the word may in such circumstances also means maybe not. I believe a substantial amount may eventually be repatriated.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/sweden-expel-80-000-migrants-015149730.html

Here is an interesting point, where I have been mentioning a lack of security, which we can see has reduced the number of migrants

The number of migrant arrivals has dropped sharply since it brought in systematic photo ID checks for travellers earlier this month.

But the media report still seems to be blaming the Swedish authorities for a murder of one of its care workers, for which a teenage migrant was charged.


See

The number of migrant arrivals has dropped sharply since it brought in systematic photo ID checks for travellers earlier this month.

The announcement comes after a teenage asylum seeker was arrested on suspicion of murdering a female employee at a youth refugee centre in Molndal, near Gothenburg, earlier this week.

A motive for the stabbing attack was not clear, but her death has led to questions about overcrowded conditions in some centres, with too few adults and employees to look after children, many traumatised by war.

Traumatized is still used as justification for any acts of violence and breaking the law. Perhaps the court may apply the law in sentencing after a fair trial.
Perhaps the insistence of ID checks will reduce the proportion of crimes.

After the end of WW2, there were millions of truly traumatized people in Europe and elsewhere. Very few used that as an excuse to commit crimes.

 

[untermensche]

After the end of WW2, there were millions of truly traumatized people in Europe and elsewhere. Very few used that as an excuse to commit crimes.

None-the-less, they committed many crimes. To think there was no crime is to be a child.

 

[4321lynx]

It's a huge gaping wound and a cause of a lot of trouble.

And since it is happening with US support it is a US issue.

I don't question that there's a huge gaping hole. I'm wondering why the size of that hole is so out of proportion? And why the rest of the world is supposed to care as much as we are? I can think of a whole bag of conflicts since 1948 that that are as serious and complex as the Israel-Palestine conflict. Yet, we don't give many fucks. We just keep coming back to this run-of-the-mill festering mess. I'm just asking why? Israel is a tiny speck of a nation. It's roughly the size of Sweden. Who cares this fucking much? Yes, it's a mess. But I care less about this conflict than the conflict in Sudan, Rwanda, ex-Yugoslavia, Ukraine, Uigur conflict in China, Hong Kong's democracy issues, Internet censorship, Arab Spring's aftermath, South Africa's continual slide into dysfunction, Zimbabwe, Boko Haram, Al-Qaeda vs the world, Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia, the endless Somalia bullshit, Al-Shabaab, Greece's economic woes, the rise of nationalism in Europe and the topic of this thread. And that's just off the top of my head. I'm sure I've forgotten hundreds, if not thousands, of contenders as a bigger bag of mess than this conflict.

And here's the clincher, there's been nothing new to Israel/Palestine conflict in the last 50 years. It's the same bullshit as in 1948. There's two highly nationalistic and chauvinistic groups squabbling over the same plot of land and they are seemingly unable to respect each other. Which needs to happen before any negotiation is meaningful. As long as this situation remains the same, I don't know what there is to discuss? To quote my Hungarian-Israeli (and Jewish) ex-wife when I asked her what she thinks of the conflict. Her answer was "the Palestinians and Israelis deserve each other".

Why do you care so fucking much?

Nobody wants to answer your question, and have conciously or subconciously changed the subject to South Africa.

I'll give it a shot.

We Europeans and North Americans still feel guilty about the way the Jews were treated in the past, even if we don't admit it and were not alive at the time this happened. The way they were treated was enough for some of them to become Zionists and seek refuge and peace in Palestine, at that time a possession of the Ottoman Empire. Later this continued under British rule, with rising Arab opposition to it.
After centuries of discrimination and sporadic murder of Jews by Europe's Christians all over Europe at some time or another, came the Shoah or Holocaust, and after that, the mass immigration to and creation and defence of Israel.
This involved mass killing and expulsion of Arabs and subsequent "firm" rule of Arabs by Israelis, including the theft of land and property in the Occupied Territories.
All this backed by the USA and its powerful Jewish lobby, and to a lesser or greater extent by Europe, by supply of arms and finances.
Israel's "Realpolitik" (the only possible way it can exist without using its nuclear arsenal) continues to oppress the Arabs and its theft of land continues un abated, and now the US and Europe feel (slightly) guilty about conspiring to aid and abet that in practice, with the occasional anti-Israeli vote in the UN to salve their consciences, always vetoed by the US. And US aid to Israel continues and France and Russia and others want to make deals with Iran now the sanctions are lifted, all sides making sanctimonious noises.

In the meantime the Arab and Islamist-Iranian threat to Israel continues and all Israelis and all Arabs are aware of this.

And of course religions, and their "holy places", make everything worse and both sides are becoming more and more hawkish. (The unusual sight of theocrat Iranian ruler and of alleged secularist Netanyahu acting in a statesmanlike fashion may surprise some, but both of these individuals know that they are doing just that, acting, whilst gathering power and allies.)

So your wife is right, they deserve one another, but she might as well say that we all, the humans, the technologically and philosophically "advanced" apes who, for all our posturing, remain tribalist aggressive animals, we too, deserve one another.