Nilats

Americans must have run out of their soybeans... not looking good... They'll be back when they get some more....

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

Your repeated attempts to spin aside, this isn't "my proposal" - but things which were discussed in the context of the conflict, and even during negotiations. That you're either truly ignorant of this, or pretending to be, while whining about about said ignorance being pointed out is about the level of "debate" expected.

 

I haven't said it "isn't going to work". Acknowledging that it's one of the most problematic  issues in an already complex conflict is being realistic. Public opinion in Israel, and accompanying public campaigns, weren't necessarily very supportive on previous instances - and yet, these came to pass. No one claimed it  would be easy, straightforward or painless. Same comment as above applies.

 

As for your childish "stand with Israel" posturing bit - you're welcome to it. But it still doesn't validate your initial comments, painting Israeli views as single-minded and united over this issue. What you "stand with" is, perhaps, more of a right-wing view (disregarding previous claims to lean left, or whatever).

 

Simple thing to understand is that your "take" on Israeli politics is one-dimensional, at best.

 

 

You are posting complete nonsense. Abiding by the countries Principal law enacted 30 years ago is not a "Right Wing" perspective - it's a normal patriotic perspective... So much pomp but you can't even get the basics right it seems. Google: Basic Law Jerusalem 1980. I'm starting to get suspicions that you've never even been to the country... There's no essential requirement for anyone to debate countries' principal laws - it has nothing to do with political pluralism - the law is the law, and the capital is the capital.

6 hours ago, Morch said:

 

There is no "best plan" addressing issues pertaining to Jerusalem. It's not even a problem that can be seriously tackled outside of the broader context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Like pretty much any realistic conflict resolution scenario, it would be full of bumps and mishaps, some issues will not be adequately sorted and certain parties will not be supportive (to put it mildly).

 

IMO, as part of an overall agreement, the city ought to be divided (which is pretty much how things stand anyway). The main problem will remain sovereignty over the holy sites. Both sides' nationalistic and religious narratives made sure concessions on this front are difficult.

 

In a more reasonable setting, some sort of international oversight regarding access and security issues might have worked, but things being what they are, even this would be a hard sale for both people, and a challenge to maintain an uphold.

 

The one who's into making strong (if inaccurate) claims is you, and there's no obligation to follow your lead on this. With regard to public support, it would depend what's actually on offer, and how the offer is perceived. Hence, most of this is just talk - because there's no credible offer, and perceptions being what they are (rightly so too, to an extent).

 

And again, whether the question is about East Jerusalem (as in mostly Arab neighborhoods), or East Jerusalem (as in the holy sites) carries a different answer with regard to public support. The former less problematic than the latter.

 

I think a credible, realistic plan could be expected to a garner about 40% support. This is based on factoring Israel's sizeable Arab minority (likely to be favorable), and partial support from Jewish opposition. This has a lot to do with both context and content of the actual proposition. Given current conditions, atmosphere and demographic trends, I'm not overly optimistic as to the prospects of the projected support expanding much. Then again, there were past key decisions related to the conflict were taken with less than impressive majorities.

 

Notably, you do not actually provide anything other than your supposed "experience" to validate your point of view, but expect others to do so.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this. So you are saying your own proposal isn't going to work? I still stand with Israel to deal with this entirely internal matter as it sees fit. I don't understand your relationship to Israel, so it's not clear to me how your opinion or sentiments are relevant in this case.

Simple thing to understand is that Israel has full right to deem any foreigner trying to divide its national capital as threat to national security - and imo they would be right in doing so.

22 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Is that the best spin you can pull? I'm pointing out obvious inaccuracies and flaws in your "take", your response? More of the same, plus lame deflections.

 

There wasn't any suggestion in my posts that I "speak on behalf of all Israelis". If anything, the point made was that there are differing views within Israel. The one advocating some sort of hive-mind like attitude was yourself.

 

And as commented on earlier, not being well-informed, but holding strong views, is not necessarily a stance which commands respect, or even being taken seriously.

Can you write your opinion about what you think are the best plans to solve the East/West Jerusalem issue, and how many Israelis hold these opinions similar to yours... it's definitely on topic - I'm actually curious myself now, so feel free to state any opinions you like and your calculations how many Israelis in percentage support it. Just saying there are "different opinions" which is a general statement which is definitely always true btw, is not clear if it's really relevant to the overall sentiment of the country in this specific case...

4 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

I doubt your opening comment, nothing in your posts suggests or supports it. More like low level debate tactics.

 

With regard to your strong statements regarding Jerusalem - the question is what comes under the label of "Jerusalem".  De facto, the city is split between east and west, and I do not think all Israelis are, when push comes to shove, quite as invested in keeping control of East Jerusalem. This excludes the holy sites, which are indeed a problem issue, and assumes that security concerns could be adequately resolved.

 

The rest of your post is mostly more off-topic counterfactual waffle.

 

Since I do not jump at others accusing them of ignorance in every sentence - seems to be your only tactic in any argument... can we see some verifiable credentials that make you think that you can speak on behalf of all Israelis on this subject. Are you a leader of a political party of Israel... a rabbi of Israel, minister of defense... etc... Clearly and thoroughly present who you are or quit accusing others of ignorance of fact or opinion. I speak only from my perspective and I want to stress that - I don't claim to be the most informed on these issues, I've never met Shimon Peres personally, but I know many people who have.

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

An Israeli minister, representing a right-wing party. If you think this amounts to representing all political views in Israel, you're welcome to your illusion. Or perhaps, work on better spins.

 

I'm more of a leftist myself, and as a whole Israel has strong leftist elements - that's why they provide healthcare to Arabs, those who recognize the state of Israel. The specific issue of Jerusalem is a political and security dead end for Israel. It's in the interests of Palestinians to recognize the state of Israel with Jerusalem as the capital - there's no other way to resolve that frozen state of civil war that exists there. Encouraging Palestinians to do the opposite is not a way of helping them in any humanitarian sense. The only country can and will help them is Israel - they will never receive any support from either Jordan, Syria, Lebanon... etc, other Arab countries don't care about Palestinians. So there's a lot of hypocrisy with people who claim to care about their well being and sentiments but continue to push them towards an obvious political dead and and continued misery and stagnation. 

5 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

A key feature in your posts is a reliance on supposed personal experience. Not only are these comments unverifiable, they often lack credibility when countered with facts and reason.

 

Even if you, indeed, knew that many Israelis and was intimate with their political views, it would indicate nothing more than your limited exposure to differing views within the country.

 

As for your "recommendations" - the list is kinda funny considering you claim to actually have knowledge of political views, and the assertion that Israelis aren't shy about talking politics.

 

As for my comment being an exaggeration, may I suggest visiting past topics, which are peppered with numerous links to articles, columns and references from Israeli sources debating various aspects of said issues.

 

You (and unsurprisingly, other posters from the other side of the political spectrum) are trying to present a one-dimensional, extreme take, as if it was an uncontested consensus. That's not really the case, unless one is invested in oversimplification or trying to mislead.

So far the Israeli minister confirmed exactly what I said in his statement, so if we have an exception to the usual views on this subject - it's probably you ????

4 hours ago, Morch said:

 

No, it isn't an all-encompassing "Israeli standpoint". To begin with Israel's sizeable Arab minority may see things differently, and then there are those Israelis not fully embracing right wing positions as you imply.

 

There is a wide consensus among Israeli Jews regarding Jerusalem's status as the county capital - what comes under this label, ,though, is another matter. The same popular support is not afforded for statements referencing West Jerusalem, the holy sites or East Jerusalem. As for "there hasn't been any debate about it in Israel for decades now" - that would be one of your customary counterfactual assertions. What Israeli sovereignty in Jerusalem encompasses or ought to encompass is often discussed.

Pretty much all the Israelis I knew/know - dozens and hundreds of them - everybody shares that consensus, I'm not familiar with these discussions for that reason - I've heard many other discussions, it's not the population that is shy of talking politics. As far as I know it's only discussed outside of Israel. I wouldn't recommend to discuss with anybody in Israel - Gaza, West Bank, Jerusalem, Palestine, "Jesus" - all these are best to avoid, they are far to sensitive to Israel, so when you say that it's discussed "often" is an exaggeration imo ????

2 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Yes, but then commenting on topics while claiming (or pretending to) not to be informed it somewhat of a thing with you. This bit is especially contrived, considering the number of times this point was discussed on tvf alone, nevermind international media (and, of course, Israeli media as well).

Maybe I got a bit carried away. But this is the Israeli standpoint - Jerusalem is the indisputable capital of Israel, there hasn't been any debate about it in Israel for decades now. I assume it's already 2nd or 3d generation of Israelis growing up with Jerusalem as their capital.

25 minutes ago, dexterm said:

And I too have visited Jerusalem and Israel from the occupied Golan to Eilat, plus every single surrounding country as far as Afghanistan and Pakistan. But that does not make me an expert.

 

I was horrified by the racism expressed by young Israelis I met which prompted me to research the history of the conflict, rather than believe the one sided narrative that Israel and most media push.

 

My hatred is anti the current right wing Israeli government and the racist supremacist ideology of Zionism, not the Israeli people nor Judaism.

 

I personally would like to see a true secular democracy in the whole of a united Palestine/Israel with different peoples living together in peace and prosperity respecting one another's cultures and religions.

It'll happen one day hopefully in my lifetime. And a divided Jerusalem along with the current conflict will be just a footnote in history.

What most media push is the usual picture of the Dome of the Rock, dramatic Eastern music playing in the background, rockets flying, explosions, etc etc, screaming, drama... The usual pile of nonsense because I guess it just sells really well to any type of audience around the world - none of that even remotely resembles the actual setting, pace of life in Israel - it's one of the safest countries in the world... and it's really quiet most of the time, zero drama and just people living their usual lives like everywhere else. Most western media is anti-Israel... I have no idea again what ur talking about.

"My hatred is anti the current right wing Israeli government and the racist supremacist ideology of Zionism, not the Israeli people nor Judaism."

Statements like this is precisely how I know you have zero clue of what ur talking about... I lived there for years so I have much wider exposure to the actual culture, mentality, opinions etc... I understand Hebrew, I've never once come across such nonsense opinions that you describe... You must be thinking of your Australian system of white supremacy and assuming it's the same in Israel. Is is NOT - I don't even want to waste my time with you.

If you want to see a true secular democracy - start with your own country, lots of work still to do over there.

9 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

If "might makes right" is justification, then your point is unassailable.

The fact that Jerusalem is the Jewish capital is the most well recorded fact in human history, according to all available sources, this has nothing to do with force - it's justice.

11 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

That you thought everyone knew that the whole city of Jerusalem is the capital of Israel,doesn't speak well of how informed you are. It's not like this hasn't been a huge and well reported issue since 1967.

According to Israeli law - the whole city is the capital... it's never been an issue for me, so what's there to debate. Just stating what I know.

I'm not an outright Trudeau hater  - I agree with some of the things he says/does, but the main problem I see with this guy is that due to his mega "liberal" stance and his general incompetence in understanding how to run his office, mistakes in foreign policy etc, it will obviously lead to a majority Conservative win after the next elections - and that would be a real shame for Canada imo, who knows what policies those guys could enact in Canada... so whatever Trudeau does it's all premature celebrations imo.

5 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

I have to question whether you have any acquaintance at all with the facts of the case. Do you think that because she is a Russian and was in the United States that that makes her a tourist? Have you read any of the correspondence that the had with Torshin and Erickson? Were her activities in the USA typical tourist ones?

It doesn't matter. I speak from experience. I lived in this "Anglo" setting most of my life and I've seen too many times at companies -  Russians - both male and female either fired or bullied out simply for the fact that they were Russian. Supervisors of British/American/South African and such descent have confessed it to me when I asked about it - some even giggled about it explicitly stated that they were fired or bullied out because they were Russian - it's a cultural thing and most well known "secret", and this is before this whole witch hunt started in US. To think that she could have received any of kind of fair trial under the circumstances is pure fantasy imo ????

In my opinion this woman didn't deserve this treatment - as she's obviously being used as another pawn in political game - which is an entirely internal US mess. Torturing tourists in US for advocating for their hobbies - no matter how strange they may appear to be is a new low to which even China hasn't sunk yet... Considering that Moscow hasn't kidnapped and tortured any Americans in response - seems like it's a saner place these days.

Plus all of this has some obvious elements of the typical male incompetence anxiety hate fest - something which I definitely can't relate to ????

So she will effectively be tried in Canada first - the extradition hearing will be a very exciting and lengthy process with millions of people following it around the world. Canada didn't really have a choice about it. Chinese officials are acting like thugs in this case - they don't understand how the judicial system works - so they just started kidnapping people - this just shows what China really is.

Most people don't understand how the process works... the decision whether to let her go or not can only be made during the extradition hearing - the process which could take as long as 10 years. At that hearing - all these arguments can be made, and her lawyer needs to submit evidence if anyone believes this was politically motivated, etc... I'm not lawyer, but this is basic stuff. She's very lucky that they granted her bail - waiting 10 years at a Canadian Correctional facility would have literally driven her insane or killed her - I don't think she was cut out for kind of environment. There are literally people with severe drug addiction, violence and mental problems.

3 hours ago, bristolboy said:

You mean "predictably" like when he faced down Trump over his outrageous Nafta revision demands? Your characterization is pure nonsense.

In the context of international common sense - there was nothing outrageous about Trump's demands... the problem is that prior to that Trudeau defacto openly declared Canada as an ideological rival to the United States - if you want to know how the United States deals with its rivals - you should read some books about it... pretty much exactly the same way every time.

The sad part is that a Canadian got kidnapped over this... in addition Meng herself was an investor in Canada - she does have connections in Vancouver, she used to live there. The Arrest Warrant came from New York( Trump's home city) and now Trump is playing it like - "those damn Canadians arrested her, I'm just trying to help... gee..."

Considering that Trump attacked and hurt Canada's Dairy industry, Auto industry - it makes you wonder if Canada itself was a target with this obvious stink up started by the US. Regardless of the outcome - relationship with both of these countries should be re-evaluated and thoroughly investigated imo and conclusions should be made - the problem in Canada is that nobody is at the helm at the moment... Trudeau predictably is being played like a Muppet by everybody.