Official Israel/Palestine discussion thread

[spadelexus]

I'm in no way over complicating the situation. It is a complicated situation. Having some vision is what we all need. Our problems don't magically go away and the world goes on after we die. It makes sense to work on problems that we have.



Hamas is a bunch of terrorist kunts and nothing is happening tomorrow.

You don't have to assume a Palestinian state will be created. There is the two state solution and other options. However that is not what the US has committed to and now that Israel has kicked out the two state solution they need to come up with a new plan or the US will indeed adjust its stance towards Israel regarding this matter.

I hope you see what I'm getting at. There needs to be some plan. Something. Something people on both sides can work on. Nothing won't do.

You didn't answer my question GOO. You claim that a 2 state solution is in Americas best interest. Today Hamas is in the government, that, if today a Palestinian state were to be created Hamas would control - at the very least - part of that state. So how can a state controlled by terrorists be in the US's best interest?

Please explain.

This is not complicated at all. Other parts to the puzzle are, this one is pretty simple.

[GreatOldOne]

You didn't answer my question GOO. You claim that a 2 state solution is in Americas best interest. Today Hamas is in the government, that, if today a Palestinian state were to be created Hamas would control - at the very least - part of that state. So how can a state controlled by terrorists be in the US's best interest?

Please explain.

Perhaps you should up your reading comprehension and try to reread my posts. I will not suffer through another Nutsy when you at least clearly can read.

This is not complicated at all. Other parts to the puzzle are, this one is pretty simple.

Fantastic. Excellent. Thank you for solving the worlds problems. Especially the Israel/Palestinian issue.

[TheNewbie]

There's no argument to be made regarding the IDF being less precise than people who literally shoot unguided rockets into civilian areas. Everybody knows Israel goes to great lengths. Even Israels enemies know this. They manipulate that.

That is however separate from the issue of there being a two state solution or not.

Think long term. What is going to happen in 100 years. There will be 100 years from now. There will be 1000 years from now.

The Palestinians need to adopt non-violence. That would be the key which unlocks their jail in my opinion.

I said it before, and I'll say it again. I fully support two state solution. Israel should completely disengage from the Palestinian territory, and the Palestinian people. The sooner, the better.

I honestly can not understand Israeli extremists who want to keep the territories. I'm not gonna lie, I don't say it because I love Palestinians, but because I believe it will be best for Israel.

Having said that, I must stress that the 2-state solution must be attained in a peaceful manner, and as long as the Palestinian will keep practice terrorism, I will fully support Israel's right to defend it's people.

[KahunaBF]

The Palestinians already have a state, its called Jordan.

[CXC3000]

Hi everyone, sorry to see that it is still a status quo in terms of the JIDF crew on here.

It's to be expected.

the depends on the findings of the investigations of the military police and the justice system. as i judge the military police and the justice system capable of doing the tasks they were created for i think those engaged in these wrongdoings will be brought to justice.

Unfortunately those guilty of heinous crimes are just given a slap on the wrist. For example, this from not too long ago :

Not guilty. The Israeli captain who emptied his rifle into a Palestinian schoolgirl

Officer ignored warnings that teenager was terrified
Defence says 'confirming the kill' standard practice

An Israeli army officer who fired the entire magazine of his automatic rifle into a 13-year-old Palestinian girl and then said he would have done the same even if she had been three years old was acquitted on all charges by a military court yesterday.

The soldier, who has only been identified as "Captain R", was charged with relatively minor offences for the killing of Iman al-Hams who was shot 17 times as she ventured near an Israeli army post near Rafah refugee camp in Gaza a year ago.

The manner of Iman's killing, and the revelation of a tape recording in which the captain is warned that she was just a child who was "scared to death", made the shooting one of the most controversial since the Palestinian intifada erupted five years ago even though hundreds of other children have also died.

After the verdict, Iman's father, Samir al-Hams, said the army never intended to hold the soldier accountable.

"They did not charge him with Iman's murder, only with small offences, and now they say he is innocent of those even though he shot my daughter so many times," he said. "This was the cold-blooded murder of a girl. The soldier murdered her once and the court has murdered her again. What is the message? They are telling their soldiers to kill Palestinian children."

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/nov/16/israel2

[KahunaBF]

Someone please tell me how a Palestine state would not become another ****lia?

[spadelexus]

Perhaps you should up your reading comprehension and try to reread my posts. I will not suffer through another Nutsy when you at least clearly can read.



Fantastic. Excellent. Thank you for solving the worlds problems. Especially the Israel/Palestinian issue.

I read your posts. Did you or did you not claim a two state solution is in Americas best interest? I asked how is that in Americas best interest? How does America benefit? Given the current situation on the ground the exact opposite is true.

Since you are avoiding my question (for obvious reasons) I'll guess at what it really is that you believe will be in Americas best interest concerning a two state solution:

A Palestine run by a pro-American gov't peaceful with its neighbors and not involved in terror..

This is my point. That idea was a concept forged by the Oslo accords. 1 intafadah and 2 Gaza wars later, Hamas has strong armed their way into power., and this. "Vision" is a pipe dream. So why on earth would anybody in their right mind continue on a trajectory that will allow a terrorist group to run a country? That makes no sense whatsoever.

So back to my original point, Bibi has the interests of his country in mind first and foremost obviously, but as Americans we have to realize that the reason he is against a two state solution, is the same reason we should be against it: because it will be giving jihadist sharia law dictating, US flag burning terrorists their own friggin country!!

Therefore this "vision" or "conceptual" State of Palestine is nothing more then a pipe dream. If you want Hamas to run their own country then back a two state solution. If you want to let a pro-American gov't assume power than throw the 2 state solution out the window until the Palestinians can get their act together. And if they can't, It's nobodies fault but their own. Both of those scenarios are far better for America then a State controlled by Hamas, which Im pretty sure you agree, you just haven't fully thought through what it means to support a two state solution in the current climate of today's reality, and not in obama fantasy land.

[GreatOldOne]

I read your posts. Did you or did you not claim a two state solution is in Americas best interest? I asked how is that in Americas best interest? How does America benefit? Given the current situation on the ground the exact opposite is true.

Since you are avoiding my question (for obvious reasons)

The obvious reason is it's tiresome to repost what I've already said to a person who didn't understand it the first time. It makes me question why I'm having this conversation...again.

It is time for the US to re-calibrate our interests.

What I'm saying is in no way radical by the way. This is our stated passive-aggressive, for the moment, position in hopes of encouraging policy change in Israel. Reading between lines of what the administration says it appears to me like Stop fuking with our politics or you will get a boot in your ass hard and for FFS do something about the Palestinians.

I disagree that it's not in the interest of the United States to support the creation of Palestinian state. It is not in the interest of Israel for the United States to support the creation of a Palestinian state.

There isn't enough hand-waving in the world for pro-Israel lobby to avoid this. AIPAC and the Republicans are now trying to push through congress a bill which will put us at economic odds with anybody in Europe who decides they've had enough of Israel.

Literally leveraging the US economy for their own economic shield with absolutely no gain or recompense to the insurance provider.

No thanks.

If you do not see the connection to the Palestinian issue in what I've said then I don't know what to tell you.

[TranceNRG]

Israeli soldier testimony: 'Most of our shooting was random... we didn't think about civilian casualties' – video

In July 2014, Israel launched a major ground offensive into the Gaza strip in response to rockets being fired by Palestinian militants and to destroy a network of tunnels used by Hamas and other factions. By the time they left some 2,200 Palestinians had been killed, including a significant number of civilians. Now, for the first time, Israeli soldiers have described the orders they received for fighting in civilian areas – orders that treated any Palestinian as a threat. Among those who have spoken out is a 22-year-old sergeant who served in a tank.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/vid...estimony-video

[Keseff]

It's to be expected.



Unfortunately those guilty of heinous crimes are just given a slap on the wrist. For example, this from not too long ago :

Not guilty. The Israeli captain who emptied his rifle into a Palestinian schoolgirl

Officer ignored warnings that teenager was terrified
Defence says 'confirming the kill' standard practice



http://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/nov/16/israel2

it seems like the justice system failed in this case. but i dont know the reason for the 'not guilty' verdict, so i cant really judge this case... that, the fact that 1, 2, 3 etc examples don't prove a systematic problem and the fact that there are enough cases of soldiers being punished with (long-term) prison sentences after doing something like the example u cited make me judge the justice system capable.

[CXC3000]

it seems like the justice system failed in this case. but i dont know the reason for the 'not guilty' verdict, so i cant really judge this case... that, the fact that 1, 2, 3 etc examples don't prove a systematic problem and the fact that there are enough cases of soldiers being punished with (long-term) prison sentences after doing something like the example u cited make me judge the justice system capable.

What about post TranceNRG's post #5078 ? :

Israeli soldiers have described the orders they received for fighting in civilian areas – orders that treated any Palestinian as a threat..

[Keseff]

Israeli soldier testimony: 'Most of our shooting was random... we didn't think about civilian casualties' – video



http://www.theguardian.com/world/vid...estimony-video

i think this guy has some good points about the report :P

Former Associated Press reporter Matti Friedman on Tuesday wrote a scathing criticism of the recently issued report from NGO Breaking the Silence on the conduct of Israeli soldiers during last summer’s Gaza war.

In an extended ******** post, Friedman blasted the report, and simultaneously tried to put it in context.

Friedman began by addressing testimony presented by Israeli soldiers in the report, to the effect that their compliance with the laws of war was much more lax than it should have been. He noted that “War is awful” and “people come back feeling upset about things they’ve seen and done. Some observers are reliable, and others aren’t.” He said that “Some of the things described in the report no doubt happened as they were described. Others didn’t. Infantrymen at the bottom of the hierarchy often don’t understand what they’re seeing, or the reasons for what they’re doing, and I’m speaking from experience.”

According to Friedman, such orders that might seem too aggressive at the ground level would make more sense the higher one goes up on the ladder of the military hierarchy.

“For example, open-fire regulations at a particular time could seem too aggressive given your limited understanding of where you are.” But, he said, “If you have all of the information at your disposal – and no soldier does – you might understand why.”

Yet, things are different for the higher military echelons who, by nature of their positions, have a better understanding and vision of the total battlefield. “A target shelled for reasons unknown to you might have been shelled for good reason after all. Or not. You don’t know, and in many cases (but not all) it’s a mistake to think you do.”

Because of that inherent inability to understand the total battlefield, Friedman says that, “drawing broad conclusions about Israeli military practice from ‘testimonies’ of this kind is irresponsible.”

He also had criticism for the journalists who reported on the findings of the Breaking the Silence report and assigned credibility to its content. “I hope that most intelligent people have stopped taking international press coverage of Israel too seriously,” said Friedman.

He also criticized their methodology. “Professional journalists looking at this report, and at similar reports, should be asking… Compared to what? IDF open-fire regulations are lax – compared to what? Civilian casualty rates are high – compared to what? Compared to the U.S. in Fallujah? The British in Northern Ireland? The Canadians in Helmand Province?”

He added that, “‘Lax’ and ‘high’ are relative terms. If Israel is being compared to other countries in similar situations, we need to know what the comparison is. Otherwise, beyond the details of individual instances the broad criticism is meaningless.”

Regarding Breaking the Silence, Friedman noted that while it was once an organization made up of IDF veterans trying to “expose Israelis to the nature of service in the occupied territories in order to have a political impact on Israeli society,” it was no longer such an organization.

“Now it is something else,” said Friedman, since its funds come largely from European donors, making it an organization, “which serves mainly to provide international reporters with the lurid examples of Israeli malfeasance that they crave.”

Because of the fact that Breaking the Silence is no longer attempting to address Israeli society, its motives and reports must be suspect, Friedman said. And so long as it acts in the interests of foreign powers, rather than Israelis, “Israelis will continue to live without the strong left that we need – one that comes from Israel, is part of Israel, and is concerned with bettering our society, not with posturing for an audience abroad whose hostile obsession with us has nothing to do with us at all,” Friedman said.

Friedman drew attention last summer for an extensive critique of the AP’s coverage of Israel, published by Tablet magazine.

http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/05/05...om-video-cat-1

[Keseff]

What about post TranceNRG's post #5078 ? :

i personally think this is a morally wrong practice and the people who employed such tactics and enforced them need to be punished.

[CXC3000]

Keseff, one pro-IDF journalist (Matti Friedman) miles away vs. actual soldiers on the ground ?

Come on.

[Keseff]

Keseff, one pro-IDF journalist (Matti Friedman) miles away vs. actual soldiers on the ground ?

Come on.

its not his word vs the soldiers their word, they don't contradict imo. his words just offer some context and reason to interpret the soldiers their words with a more critical stance.

[TranceNRG]

its not his word vs the soldiers their word, they don't contradict imo. his words just offer some context and reason to interpret the soldiers their words with a more critical stance.

There was already a context in place.

http://www.breakingthesilence.org.il/testimonies/videos

^ Countless other testimonies of soldiers in the occupied territories.

This latest report isn't new in the sense that it sheds light on something unknown before, rather it serves to indicate the continuation of the same policies of humiliation and de-humanization that is in effect and is implemented regularly in the occupied territories.

[illriginalized]

Israeli soldier testimony: 'Most of our shooting was random... we didn't think about civilian casualties' – video



http://www.theguardian.com/world/vid...estimony-video

Brah.. they were human shields.

You anti-semite.

[Keseff]

There was already a context in place.

http://www.breakingthesilence.org.il/testimonies/videos

^ Countless other testimonies of soldiers in the occupied territories.

This latest report isn't new in the sense that it sheds light on something unknown before, rather it serves to indicate the continuation of the same policies of humiliation and de-humanization that is in effect and is implemented regularly in the occupied territories.

the same context that matti friedman pointed out? i didn't read it

[TranceNRG]

the same context that matti friedman pointed out? i didn't read it

No. Friedman just played the usual Zionist tactic and spewed the typical Zionist non-sense, both aimed at justifying aggression and dismissing criticism.

[illriginalized]

roflmao so true. ^^^

[Keseff]

No. Friedman just played the usual Zionist tactic and spewed the typical Zionist non-sense, both aimed at justifying aggression and dismissing criticism.

i gave each point of him a letter, can u match each letter to the relevant number in your pic? bc i srsly cant

A

He said that “Some of the things described in the report no doubt happened as they were described. Others didn’t. Infantrymen at the bottom of the hierarchy often don’t understand what they’re seeing, or the reasons for what they’re doing, and I’m speaking from experience.”

According to Friedman, such orders that might seem too aggressive at the ground level would make more sense the higher one goes up on the ladder of the military hierarchy.

“For example, open-fire regulations at a particular time could seem too aggressive given your limited understanding of where you are.” But, he said, “If you have all of the information at your disposal – and no soldier does – you might understand why.”

Yet, things are different for the higher military echelons who, by nature of their positions, have a better understanding and vision of the total battlefield. “A target shelled for reasons unknown to you might have been shelled for good reason after all. Or not. You don’t know, and in many cases (but not all) it’s a mistake to think you do.”

Because of that inherent inability to understand the total battlefield, Friedman says that, “drawing broad conclusions about Israeli military practice from ‘testimonies’ of this kind is irresponsible.”

B

He also had criticism for the journalists who reported on the findings of the Breaking the Silence report and assigned credibility to its content. “I hope that most intelligent people have stopped taking international press coverage of Israel too seriously,” said Friedman.

C

He also criticized their methodology. “Professional journalists looking at this report, and at similar reports, should be asking… Compared to what? IDF open-fire regulations are lax – compared to what? Civilian casualty rates are high – compared to what? Compared to the U.S. in Fallujah? The British in Northern Ireland? The Canadians in Helmand Province?”

He added that, “‘Lax’ and ‘high’ are relative terms. If Israel is being compared to other countries in similar situations, we need to know what the comparison is. Otherwise, beyond the details of individual instances the broad criticism is meaningless.”

D

Regarding Breaking the Silence, Friedman noted that while it was once an organization made up of IDF veterans trying to “expose Israelis to the nature of service in the occupied territories in order to have a political impact on Israeli society,” it was no longer such an organization.

“Now it is something else,” said Friedman, since its funds come largely from European donors, making it an organization, “which serves mainly to provide international reporters with the lurid examples of Israeli malfeasance that they crave.”

Because of the fact that Breaking the Silence is no longer attempting to address Israeli society, its motives and reports must be suspect, Friedman said. And so long as it acts in the interests of foreign powers, rather than Israelis, “Israelis will continue to live without the strong left that we need – one that comes from Israel, is part of Israel, and is concerned with bettering our society, not with posturing for an audience abroad whose hostile obsession with us has nothing to do with us at all,” Friedman said.

[TranceNRG]

i gave each point of him a letter, can u match each letter to the relevant number in your pic? bc i srsly cant

A

B

C

D

A = 5 (Accidental murder of civilians. Soldiers couldn't/didn't know; therefore, accidental murder)
C = 6 (Americans, Canadians, and British killed many more civilians in their fights)
D = 7 (Breaking the Silence is now a suspicious organization, working for foreign powers. Their sole purpose, funded by foreigners, is to show examples of "Israeli malfeasance.")
B ~ 7 (Reports against Israeli shouldn't be taken seriously. Intelligent people don't take them seriously. It implies if you do, then you're not intelligent. [not necessarily an anti-semite, but a dumbass])

[spadelexus]

The obvious reason is it's tiresome to repost what I've already said to a person who didn't understand it the first time. It makes me question why I'm having this conversation...again.



There isn't enough hand-waving in the world for pro-Israel lobby to avoid this. AIPAC and the Republicans are now trying to push through congress a bill which will put us at economic odds with anybody in Europe who decides they've had enough of Israel.

Literally leveraging the US economy for their own economic shield with absolutely no gain or recompense to the insurance provider.

No thanks.

If you do not see the connection to the Palestinian issue in what I've said then I don't know what to tell you.

Why are you bringing up side topics that are irrelevant to your statement and my question? .... Im not talking about a bill that hasn't been passed that in theory may have an adverse consequence that can't even be estimated... Lol

I'm not talking about the Europeans whose Muslim Lobby controls their Pro-Palestinean agenda!!! So why bring up Aipac? Do you think the US should bow down and take it up the arse if the Pro-Palestinian Muslim lobby who is influencing Europe's policies on the Palestinian issue are pushing an agenda that will harm the US and our interests? I'm so confused by you. On one hand, you are a rational, even keeled, loyal American who understands the threat to the world by creating a Palestinian state ruled by hamas... Yet on the other hand, you blindly accept the US's "official" policy on the Palestinian issue without looking at the current situation, because the PM of israel rustles your jammies...

You aren't thinking this through completely.

And I'm questioning your sentence before the sentence you bolded. No chit it's not good for israel (although some israelis would disagree) just as no chit it's good for hamas. So besides the obvious question of what the hell are we doing supporting an agenda that our friends will get hurt from and our enemies will get stronger from.... Your answer to my original question of how does this benifit the U.S. in anyway... Is that - some bill that hasn't been passed yet may have an unquantifiable adverse effect on the U.S. economy... ? Are you for real? facepalm.gif

You are disregarding the Muslim lobby is influencing European policy on the Palestinian issue. You are disregarding Hamas is the current gov't of this 'second' State of a 'two state solution'... You are instead pointing your finger at AIPAC, and at Bibi, while recycling some image from 1994 where Arafat and Clinton makeout on the white house lawn... This is what the Muslim lobby wants to happen. Have you lose focus on the fundamentals... You just got suckered by the european muslim lobby and its scary to me quite honestly that you can be so short sighted to go all in on policy that threatens US national security, and regional hegemony.

PS... US "unofficial policy" is to keep the status quo. I seriously doubt even Hillary will move away from this like Obama, so your projection isn't that accurate. Obama is an extremist on this topic.

[spatchcock]

#teamisrael

[GreatOldOne]

Why are you bringing up side topics that are irrelevant to your statement and my question?

I'm not.

This makes what you said irrelevant when the question is US interests versus what is in the interest of Israel.

Forgive me not answering your off-based and rhetorical questions.

[ZioBot]

Since you muzzrats haven't answered this it just show it's not about Israel it's about the Jews who you have been born to hate. So much for being the religion of peace lol, pathetic.

why do you think the leaders say no at every opportunity to have a state? because they know it'd be another ****lia and the handouts would stop.

as you say, its nothing to do with the state of palestine just the end of the state of israel.

[Tha big kahoona]

Since you muzzrats haven't answered this it just show it's not about Israel it's about the Jews who you have been born to hate. So much for being the religion of peace lol, pathetic.

For a person crying antisemitism, you really are disrespectful of others. You're not the only one either. seems to be a shared theme

[KahunaBF]

For a person crying antisemitism, you really are disrespectful of others. You're not the only one either. seems to be a shared theme

You have me confused with someone else.

I love Israel.

[Keseff]

A = 5 (Accidental murder of civilians. Soldiers couldn't/didn't know; therefore, accidental murder)

What Friedman says: soldiers might have not known or misunderstood the reasons for killings civilians.
Your conclusion: soldiers didn't know they were killing civilians.

Sorry, it just doesn't match. Next.

C = 6 (Americans, Canadians, and British killed many more civilians in their fights)

Friedman is criticizing the comparison with other countries the 'breaking the silence' report implicitly made. So he is drawing upon the 'but look at how terrible Israel is compared to other countries' argument that was already introduced.

D = 7 (Breaking the Silence is now a suspicious organization, working for foreign powers. Their sole purpose, funded by foreigners, is to show examples of "Israeli malfeasance.")

B ~ 7 (Reports against Israeli shouldn't be taken seriously. Intelligent people don't take them seriously. It implies if you do, then you're not intelligent. [not necessarily an anti-semite, but a dumbass])

Both D and B match in the sense that point 7 in your pic illustrates a tactic to dismiss criticism by attacking the criticizer. You have a point there.

Overall the pic is still pretty out of place.

[TranceNRG]

Ok. Thank you for your post Kessef. ☺