Hate begets Hate: "Scholar" says Palestinian civilians are legimate targets because they voted in Hamas

[whichphilosophy]

I do note it, just as I note all of Eretz Yisrael is all of Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza i.e. all of Palestine.

I also note you didn't answer the question when you responded to my post. The dreams of the Palestinian people to have a Palestinian State in all of Palestine are a mirror image of the Zionist dream to have a Jewish State in all of Eretz Yisrael. What makes one perfectly acceptable and the other absolutely unreasonable?

Most Israelis accept coexistence. Most Palestinians don't.

The Israelis do not recognize Palestinian as a State and voted against this in the UN vote, and supported by the US veto. 138 voted in favour of a Palestinian state, while 9 voted against. Those who voted against were Canada, Czech Republic, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Nauru, Panama, Palau, United States. There were 46 abstentions.

How could Israel expect Palestine to accept its conditions under such circumstances where it is systematically colonizing the West Bank (having pulled out of the Gaza area some years ago.
Hamas has stated it will support an Israeli state within the 1967 borders.
One issue is about boundaries but another issue which stalled the peace talks more than anything is the Israeli invasion of the West Bank. This has undermined the efforts of those Palestinians who seek peace. The longer the talks are stalled the more land Israel can exist.

However there is room for both to exist within clearly defined borders. However what seems to be a problem is Israel simply wants to take over all the territory, as based on its actions. Hamas can think Israel more than anyone for its election win several years ago.

 

[Arctish]

I do note it, just as I note all of Eretz Yisrael is all of Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza i.e. all of Palestine.

I also note you didn't answer the question when you responded to my post. The dreams of the Palestinian people to have a Palestinian State in all of Palestine are a mirror image of the Zionist dream to have a Jewish State in all of Eretz Yisrael. What makes one perfectly acceptable and the other absolutely unreasonable?

Most Israelis accept coexistence. Most Palestinians don't.

Your response is remarkable unresponsive.

I'm asking why you find one dream perfectly acceptable and the other absolutely unreasonable when both dreams are mirror images of each other.

Palestinians want to live in peace in their own country spanning the breadth of Palestine.

Israeli Zionists want to live in peace in their own country spanning the breadth of Eretz Yisrael.

Palestine = Eretz Yisrael.

It's the same dream, the same aspiration. Why do you find the Palestinian dream unreasonable, even reprehensible, when you find the Zionist dream acceptable, even laudable?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Most Israelis accept coexistence. Most Palestinians don't.

The Israeli acceptance of coexistence is result of Israel having its own state and security. In 1948 and before that, the Zionists weren't nearly as accepting. Heck, they even protested the British decision to split off Trans-Jordan because it reduced the future land for Eretz Yisrael!

There is no reason to think Palestinians wouldn't moderate their opinion once they have a secure, viable state of their own.

The Israelis expected coexistence from the start.

And there's no reason to think the Palestinians will moderate while they have the Jihadists egging them on.

 

[untermensche]

The Israeli acceptance of coexistence is result of Israel having its own state and security. In 1948 and before that, the Zionists weren't nearly as accepting. Heck, they even protested the British decision to split off Trans-Jordan because it reduced the future land for Eretz Yisrael!

There is no reason to think Palestinians wouldn't moderate their opinion once they have a secure, viable state of their own.

The Israelis expected coexistence from the start.

And there's no reason to think the Palestinians will moderate while they have the Jihadists egging them on.

They expected coexistence?

Is that why they did all that ethnic cleansing?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Most Israelis accept coexistence. Most Palestinians don't.

The Israelis do not recognize Palestinian as a State and voted against this in the UN vote, and supported by the US veto. 138 voted in favour of a Palestinian state, while 9 voted against. Those who voted against were Canada, Czech Republic, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Nauru, Panama, Palau, United States. There were 46 abstentions.

Bigger picture: The Palestinians don't want to negotiate borders etc with Israel, they bypassed the negotiations that have taken place and went to the UN instead. Of course Israel objected!

How could Israel expect Palestine to accept its conditions under such circumstances where it is systematically colonizing the West Bank (having pulled out of the Gaza area some years ago.
Hamas has stated it will support an Israeli state within the 1967 borders.

Hamas has stated that it will support a truce with Israel for a while, not that it will agree to peace. Hamas' record on such agreements is abysmal.

One issue is about boundaries but another issue which stalled the peace talks more than anything is the Israeli invasion of the West Bank. This has undermined the efforts of those Palestinians who seek peace. The longer the talks are stalled the more land Israel can exist.

1) The Palestinians do little talking and no agreeing.

2) You're still ignoring the fact that the wall made a de-facto freeze of the border.

However there is room for both to exist within clearly defined borders. However what seems to be a problem is Israel simply wants to take over all the territory, as based on its actions. Hamas can think Israel more than anyone for its election win several years ago.

It seems to me that you are falling for the Palestinian PR.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Most Israelis accept coexistence. Most Palestinians don't.

Your response is remarkable unresponsive.

I'm asking why you find one dream perfectly acceptable and the other absolutely unreasonable when both dreams are mirror images of each other.

I don't find either acceptable, I thought my response made that clear. I used to favor a two-state solution. These days I favor a three-state solution. While I have no hope of peace with Gaza I think peace with Fatah is within the realm of possibility because the Jihadist money is going to the more violent groups.

On the other hand, it's treason for Fatah to agree to a peace that's acceptable to Israel. Thus even this is likely not going to happen.

- - - Updated - - -

The Israelis expected coexistence from the start.

And there's no reason to think the Palestinians will moderate while they have the Jihadists egging them on.

They expected coexistence?

Is that why they did all that ethnic cleansing?

They expected coexistence. The Arabs chose the path of war instead.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Most Israelis accept coexistence. Most Palestinians don't.

The Israeli acceptance of coexistence is result of Israel having its own state and security. In 1948 and before that, the Zionists weren't nearly as accepting. Heck, they even protested the British decision to split off Trans-Jordan because it reduced the future land for Eretz Yisrael!

There is no reason to think Palestinians wouldn't moderate their opinion once they have a secure, viable state of their own.

QFT. Hypothetical questions notwithstanding, simple human nature dictates that most people will happily trade ideals for security if given a chance to do so. This is especially true of people who have had to live insecurely for a very long time; even fanatics will usually moderate their positions if doing so will guarantee them an improved lifestyle for themselves and their families.

Of course, LP's theory is that Palestinian fanaticism is GENETIC and that they will harbor that long-term goal of one day exterminating Israel for fifty years or more, always nurturing it on the sly, until one day they raise an army big enough and sophisticated enough to march into Israel and slaughter them all in one final cataclysmic orgy of bloodshed.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

The Israeli acceptance of coexistence is result of Israel having its own state and security. In 1948 and before that, the Zionists weren't nearly as accepting. Heck, they even protested the British decision to split off Trans-Jordan because it reduced the future land for Eretz Yisrael!

There is no reason to think Palestinians wouldn't moderate their opinion once they have a secure, viable state of their own.

The Israelis expected coexistence from the start.

No they didn't:

What we really want is not that the land remain whole and unified. What we want is that the whole and unified land be Jewish. A unified Eretz Israeli would be no source of satisfaction for me– if it were Arab.

From our standpoint, the status quo is deadly poison. We want to change the status quo. But how can this change come about? How can this land become ours? The decisive question is: Does the establishment of a Jewish state [in only part of Palestine] advance or retard the conversion of this country into a Jewish country?

My assumption (which is why I am a fervent proponent of a state, even though it is now linked to partition) is that a Jewish state on only part of the land is not the end but the beginning.

How do you suppose they were going to establish a "Jewish state" in a region in which Jews were not actually the majority? Especially since it's pretty clear from the balance of Ben Gurion's writings that the conquest of Judea and Samaria were always on the agenda anyway? The answer is, they didn't. The Peel Comission proposed back in 1937 that a "voluntary transfer" of Arabs out of Palestine would accompany Jewish migration into the region, and Ben Gurion et al pushed for terms in the proposal that would mean eventually the transfer would cease to be voluntary.

And there's no reason to think the Palestinians will moderate while they have the Jihadists egging them on.

Why not? You expect them to moderate their positions -- even renounce the jihadists -- while the Israelis are bombing the fuck out of them. Why would you NOT expect them to do so in a time of peace?

 

[Shadowy Man]

Israel bends over backwards to minimize civilian casualties...

I think that the problem that a lot of people have with the current conflict is that this (what you say above) is not very clear at all. To some of us, Israeli forces look a lot like the proverbial bull in the china shop.

 

[untermensche]

They expected coexistence. The Arabs chose the path of war instead.

No they didn't. They were blind religious idiots who thought some god would take of them and protect them from the consequences of their abuses.

They abused tens of thousands based on some primitive book of fairy tales.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Israel bends over backwards to minimize civilian casualties...

I think that the problem that a lot of people have with the current conflict is that this (what you say above) is not very clear at all. To some of us, Israeli forces look a lot like the proverbial bull in the china shop.

There are a lot of people who don't understand what's going on, how hard Hamas works to cause those civilian casualties.

 

[laughing dog]

I think that the problem that a lot of people have with the current conflict is that this (what you say above) is not very clear at all. To some of us, Israeli forces look a lot like the proverbial bull in the china shop.

There are a lot of people who don't understand what's going on, how hard Hamas works to cause those civilian casualties.

And how readily the IDF obliges them.

 

[untermensche]

There are a lot of people who don't understand what's going on, how hard Hamas works to cause those civilian casualties.

If all one reads is American or Israeli coverage they will definitely not know what is going on.

 

[Shadowy Man]

There are a lot of people who don't understand what's going on, how hard Hamas works to cause those civilian casualties.

And how readily the IDF obliges them.

This is exactly my point, and one that seems to be overlooked in virtually all discussions. In fact, if you know your enemy is willing to shoot through a human shield, the shield isn't really shielding you. And if it is Hamas' intent to make the IDF look bad for doing so, that certainly is a bad thing that I will not condone, but that doesn't mean I am obligated to condone the IDF's strategy in response. Virtually the entire discussion of this conflict is rife with false dichotomies. And anyone who thinks there may be another way is immediately brushed aside or accused of favoring terrorists. No one seems to want to discuss this rationally.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

There are a lot of people who don't understand what's going on, how hard Hamas works to cause those civilian casualties.

If all one reads is American or Israeli coverage they will definitely not know what is going on.

You mean if one doesn't read Palestinian propaganda one doesn't fall for it.


Yet more evidence of Hamas & human shields:

http://www.idfblog.com/blog/2014/08/04/captured-hamas-combat-manual-explains-benefits-human-shields/

- - - Updated - - -

There are a lot of people who don't understand what's going on, how hard Hamas works to cause those civilian casualties.

And how readily the IDF obliges them.

The IDF obliges because the failure to do so means more dead Israelis.

 

[Togo]

And anyone who thinks there may be another way is immediately brushed aside or accused of favoring terrorists. No one seems to want to discuss this rationally.

Well of course not. Discussing rationally would lead to some kind of peace, which many people desperately do not want. They feel it would empower the enemies of Israel, and lead to it's destruction, so we have to have permanent war.

 

[Underseer]

And anyone who thinks there may be another way is immediately brushed aside or accused of favoring terrorists. No one seems to want to discuss this rationally.

Well of course not. Discussing rationally would lead to some kind of peace, which many people desperately do not want. They feel it would empower the enemies of Israel, and lead to it's destruction, so we have to have permanent war.

Discussing rationally would not lead to any kind of peace.

The Israeli politicians deliberately make the conflict worse and deliberately whip the Israeli citizens into a frenzy of hate in order to distract said Israeli citizens from their own corruption.

Muslim politicians similarly have a motive to fan the fires of hate and keep the conflict going.

Once the hate is whipped up, the terrorists love it because all that hate turns out to be great for recruiting and fund-raising.

There are too many politicians on both sides who benefit politically from the conflict, and so have a motive to keep the population hopped up on fear and hatred. As long as the Israeli and Palestinian people's hearts are burning with fear and hate, there will be no end to the conflict.

 

[Shadowy Man]

The IDF obliges because the failure to do so means more dead Israelis.

Example par excellence. Thank you for making my point.

 

[laughing dog]

The IDF obliges because the failure to do so means more dead Israelis.

Not only is that a terrible distortion of reality, it is a tacit admission that the IDF is complicit in the killing of civilians.

 

[Shadowy Man]

The IDF obliges because the failure to do so means more dead Israelis.

Not only is that a terrible distortion of reality, it is a tacit admission that the IDF is complicit in the killing of civilians.

It is undisputable that the IDF knows that its attacks result in the deaths of civilians. Derec even posted a video made by the IDF about how precise their methods are that uses the word "unavoidable" in that context. Everyone knows that wars result in deaths of civilians, especially waging war in a dense urban environment. What some people are taking issue with is the extent to which efforts are really being made to minimize civilian casualties and if there are any other methods that they could have used to accomplish their tactical and strategic goals without as much civilians being killed. There's a lot of "what else could they do?" language thrown around without much demonstration that any thought was actually put into what else they could do. If sources from within Gaza are to believed (and I'm sure there are some here who will not believe them) then there are targets being destroyed that are not of any military value.