Israeli right-wingers call for government crackdown on Palestinian violence

[webfact]

Israeli right-wingers call for government crackdown on Palestinian violence



JERUSALEM: -- Thousands of Israeli right wingers, settlers and their supporters used the celebration at the end of the Sukkot holiday to urge the government to crackdown on rising violence in East Jerusalem.

Over the past week there have been several Jewish deaths and more injured in attacks by Palestinians.

Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu has already announced his security cabinet will authorise harsher measures including razing the homes of Palestinians responsible. More army personnel will also be deployed in the West Bank and Jerusalem.

However, the violence has been a two way affair. On Monday a 13 year-old Palestinian boy was buried after being shot dead by Israeli security forces.

Tensions have been inflamed in recent weeks at Jerusalem’s al-Aqsa mosque compound. It’s a site revered by both Palestinians and Jews – the latter calling the area Temple Mount.

Palestinians are said to fear that Jewish groups are trying to erode Muslim religious control of the site.

The US has called for calm while the UN’s chief Ban Ki-moon has warned of a dangerous slide towards escalating violence.


-- (c) Copyright Euronews 2015-10-06

[ZeldasCavern]

Wow, the picture depicts some really fun loving youth spending their afternoon playing around...

"The US has called for calm while the UN’s chief Ban Ki-moon has warned of a dangerous slide towards escalating violence."

No point of trying to find "Reasoning" or solace in an unreasonable situation.

Too many with different opinions and unreachable solutions, especially among fanatical religious zealots, extremists, and uneducated misdirected rebellious youths.

No country in the "Western" world ( right or wrong ) would put up with what Israel has dealt with for so many years...

Any other entity especially or of the Muslim world, would have taken a rake to the area long ago. Not allowing the opportunity for anyone to utter a squeak.

Other middle east Muslim countries would have bombed, poisoned, beheaded their own populace, let alone another from different house (Shiite/Sunni) as evident with what's happened in Syria, Iraq, Libya, Egypt.

[Emster23]

Israel is illegally occupying West Bank, has ignored UN telling them to withdraw, control with methods not all that different from Apartheid South Africa in the past. "harsher measures including razing the homes of Palestinians responsible." Similar to Nazi tactics. Whole family punished for actions of one family member? Is that justice and fairness? Israel likes to play the victim card, but they are being persecutors in reality.

[Jingthing]

Israel is illegally occupying West Bank, has ignored UN telling them to withdraw, control with methods not all that different from Apartheid South Africa in the past. "harsher measures including razing the homes of Palestinians responsible." Similar to Nazi tactics. Whole family punished for actions of one family member? Is that justice and fairness? Israel likes to play the victim card, but they are being persecutors in reality.

You've got it all wrong.

Israel refuses to take the victim's role.

After thousands of years of being subject to persecution, pogroms, expulsions, and industrialized mass genocide, the Jews of the world have collectively decided ... been there, done that, NEVER AGAIN.

Now break it down.

Is Israel occupying the west bank? That's one narrative. The other is that there is no Palestinian nation to occupy so that's not what's happening.

Apartheid? Don't go there. It's the Palestinian side that wants a state with no Jews. Israel includes 20 percent Arab citizens.

Raising homes? I agree that it harsh. Seems to me to be a Middle Eastern thing. Israel is a nation in the middle east and clearly they have internalized a lot of the culture there beyond eating humous. Living in a very rough neighborhood ... what do you expect?

Nazi tactics? Dude, that makes me angry. Where are the death camps of the Arabs run by the Jews? There might be genocide in the Middle east happening now but it's Islam on Islam, not Jew on Arab. Arab population in the Gaza, Judea, and Samaria region has greatly INCREASED since Israel has been established. In my view, suggesting the lie that Israel is equivalent to Nazi Germany is an expression of anti-Jewish racist hate.

But you're right ... the Palestinians have legit grievances ... but the Israelis also have legit justifications to defend themselves.

The settlements ... well, some people think it's all about the settlements and if they all withdrew, peace would magically break out. I think people who think that are naive fools.

No I don't have any brilliant solutions.

Edited October 6, 2015 by Jingthing

[ggold]

Abbas thought he could start a religious war! With his false claims that Israel wanted to change the situation on the temple mount, That "Jews dirty" feet should not enter Al aqsa. It is pure religious hate against the jews.

It has backfired on him, but if anyone is to blame for this latest round of violence it is Abbas. So this isn't about Israel owning Judea and Samaria, or even about an arab state. It is about hate for Jews.

Abbas doesn't want a Palestinian homeland he wants war.

[dexterm]

Israel is illegally occupying West Bank, has ignored UN telling them to withdraw, control with methods not all that different from Apartheid South Africa in the past. "harsher measures including razing the homes of Palestinians responsible." Similar to Nazi tactics. Whole family punished for actions of one family member? Is that justice and fairness? Israel likes to play the victim card, but they are being persecutors in reality.

You've got it all wrong.

Israel refuses to take the victim's role.

After thousands of years of being subject to persecution, pogroms, expulsions, and industrialized mass genocide, the Jews of the world have collectively decided ... been there, done that, NEVER AGAIN.

Now break it down.

Is Israel occupying the west bank? That's one narrative. The other is that there is no Palestinian nation to occupy so that's not what's happening.

Apartheid? Don't go there. It's the Palestinian side that wants a state with no Jews. Israel includes 20 percent Arab citizens.

Raising homes? I agree that it harsh. Seems to me to be a Middle Eastern thing. Israel is a nation in the middle east and clearly they have internalized a lot of the culture there beyond eating humous. Living in a very rough neighborhood ... what do you expect?

Nazi tactics? Dude, that makes me angry. Where are the death camps of the Arabs run by the Jews? There might be genocide in the Middle east happening now but it's Islam on Islam, not Jew on Arab. Arab population in the Gaza, Judea, and Samaria region has greatly INCREASED since Israel has been established. In my view, suggesting the lie that Israel is equivalent to Nazi Germany is an expression of anti-Jewish racist hate.

But you're right ... the Palestinians have legit grievances ... but the Israelis also have legit justifications to defend themselves.

The settlements ... well, some people think it's all about the settlements and if they all withdrew, peace would magically break out. I think people who think that are naive fools.

No I don't have any brilliant solutions.

Is Israel occupying the West Bank? That's one narrative. The other is that there is no Palestinian nation to occupy so that's not what's happening.

Never mind the spurious "nation" bit. Simple question: What is Israel planning to do with the 2.5 million people who were already living in the West Bank when Israel occupied/captured it in 1967...many of them with homes there for centuries if not millenia. Give them equal citizenship if Israel decides to annex it, or employ some sort of logical contortionism to justify that a New York Jew somehow takes precedence in citizenship to a resident inhabitant that Israel has taken over and kick the Palestinian out of his home.

That's the nasty racist unjust side of Zionism that I object to.

What's your answer?

Apartheid? Don't go there. It's the Palestinian side that wants a state with no Jews. Israel includes 20 percent Arab citizens.

Well, neat as it may be for you to sweep the central issue under the carpet, but let us in fact go there, because that is the everyday situation under which West Bank Palestinians live right now. If Israel wants the West Bank for its own Jewish immigrants, what are they going to do with the existing Palestinian residents..grant them full citizenship or treat them as second class non residents or worse still ethnically cleanse them. Looks awfully like apartheid to me.

If Zionist squatters would like to pay for the land they are living on as uninvited guests that they have stolen from the Palestinian owners, fulfill the law abiding citizen police check, and have the full skills test requirement to be able to contribute to the future Palestinian economy, I am sure they would be most welcome.

[uptheos]

Those slingshots/catapults and whatever they are firing, can kill and maim.

I would have no problem responding with a rifle.

[dexterm]

Those slingshots/catapults and whatever they are firing, can kill and maim.

I would have no problem responding with a rifle.

I have no doubt you wouldn't. QED. That is the whole essence of the debate...people like you, or people who will calm the situation down, end the cycle of violence and save lives on both sides

[uptheos]

Those slingshots/catapults and whatever they are firing, can kill and maim.

I would have no problem responding with a rifle.

I have no doubt you wouldn't. QED. That is the whole essence of the debate...people like you, or people who will calm the situation down, end the cycle of violence and save lives on both sides

I'm not saying I wouldn't like to see an end to violence on both sides.

What I AM saying is if one of those thugs was aiming at me and I had a rifle, I would use it......nothing to debate.

[Seastallion]

Israel is illegally occupying West Bank, has ignored UN telling them to withdraw, control with methods not all that different from Apartheid South Africa in the past. "harsher measures including razing the homes of Palestinians responsible." Similar to Nazi tactics. Whole family punished for actions of one family member? Is that justice and fairness? Israel likes to play the victim card, but they are being persecutors in reality.

You've got it all wrong.

Israel refuses to take the victim's role.

After thousands of years of being subject to persecution, pogroms, expulsions, and industrialized mass genocide, the Jews of the world have collectively decided ... been there, done that, NEVER AGAIN.

Now break it down.

Is Israel occupying the west bank? That's one narrative. The other is that there is no Palestinian nation to occupy so that's not what's happening.

Apartheid? Don't go there. It's the Palestinian side that wants a state with no Jews. Israel includes 20 percent Arab citizens.

Raising homes? I agree that it harsh. Seems to me to be a Middle Eastern thing. Israel is a nation in the middle east and clearly they have internalized a lot of the culture there beyond eating humous. Living in a very rough neighborhood ... what do you expect?

Nazi tactics? Dude, that makes me angry. Where are the death camps of the Arabs run by the Jews? There might be genocide in the Middle east happening now but it's Islam on Islam, not Jew on Arab. Arab population in the Gaza, Judea, and Samaria region has greatly INCREASED since Israel has been established. In my view, suggesting the lie that Israel is equivalent to Nazi Germany is an expression of anti-Jewish racist hate.

But you're right ... the Palestinians have legit grievances ... but the Israelis also have legit justifications to defend themselves.

The settlements ... well, some people think it's all about the settlements and if they all withdrew, peace would magically break out. I think people who think that are naive fools.

No I don't have any brilliant solutions.

Just one question:

The people who set up the Jewish state in 1947 agreed on a specific area. By what mandate do the Israelis occupy more land AS THEIR OWN?

The EUROPEAN Jews were graciously given a place to call home despite it meaning many of the indigenous Arabs had to be evicted. Since then, they have taken more and more, every year, and displaced more and more of the indigenous natives.

Why is that condoned by any decent human being?

OK, that was 2 questions.

[Emster23]

"there is no Palestinian nation to occupy" Finally got their flag raised at UN other day, despite shameful no vote by USA. Israel has done everything could to stop Palestine being recognized as nation. I recall the amazing amount of flak Hillary got in 90's when suggested a 2 state solution.

"Raising homes?" The illegal settlers are raising homes while Israeli army are razing homes.

"Nazi tactics? Dude, that makes me angry." This was in reference to Nazi tactic of wiping out family or village during war if resistance fighters were thought to be among population. Not death camps. Sorry if you thought I implied that.

"some people think it's all about the settlements and if they all withdrew, peace would magically break out." No, but would be a good step in that direction.

You mention "tough neighborhood". If some powers in town 500 miles from your neighborhood decided to give your neighborhood over to a group based on religion, would you be happy? And then tear down your house, tear down your tent you put up on the rubble, and build in choice areas, allow new residents to carry automatic weapons while you could be shot for throwing stones, would you turn the other cheek?

Mid East is god's monkey house for sure, and giving/stealing for "chosen people" some land they didn't own based on rather dubious claims is throwing gas on a fire. UN should have given New York to the Jews. There were more living there at the time and none of this "promised land" BS.

[Morch]

Wow, the picture depicts some really fun loving youth spending their afternoon playing around...

"The US has called for calm while the UN’s chief Ban Ki-moon has warned of a dangerous slide towards escalating violence."

No point of trying to find "Reasoning" or solace in an unreasonable situation.

Too many with different opinions and unreachable solutions, especially among fanatical religious zealots, extremists, and uneducated misdirected rebellious youths.

No country in the "Western" world ( right or wrong ) would put up with what Israel has dealt with for so many years...

Any other entity especially or of the Muslim world, would have taken a rake to the area long ago. Not allowing the opportunity for anyone to utter a squeak.

Other middle east Muslim countries would have bombed, poisoned, beheaded their own populace, let alone another from different house (Shiite/Sunni) as evident with what's happened in Syria, Iraq, Libya, Egypt.

Most countries in the Western world gave up on the notion of maintaining military occupation for years on end on hostile and unwilling populace. Of course, they all paid their dues, and in all cases it took a long while for change to arrive. I'm pretty sure that one way or another, this conflict will be resolved along the same lines, eventually. Mind that sweet liberty came out pretty sour in many cases. That other Middle East countries would deal with similar things in a much harsher manner is a given. Not Sure Israel would like to belong to that club, though.

Setting the bar too high (as in comparing Israel to Western democracies, which do not currently face the similar challenges to their democratic system and national security) or setting it too low (as is the case with Israel's neighbors) often leads to confusing perspectives. Allowing a range of between democracy and dictatorship (and further, allowing for different kinds of democratic systems) provides better understanding, if less by way of slogans.

The notion that democracy is an either/or concept, rather than a matter of degree and variation, is simply,,,,simple. Enough to compare different personal experience from different countries one lived in. Not all are the same, And not all countries are cut out to support the full blown modern Western ideal of democracy.

Israel is not as good as some of the Western countries, but not as bad as its neighbors. it is what it is.

And yes, one day, perhaps in the not so far future, when the State of Palestine will become a fact - we could all have a fun comparative discussion on how well that went in terms of democracy.

[Morch]

Israel is illegally occupying West Bank, has ignored UN telling them to withdraw, control with methods not all that different from Apartheid South Africa in the past. "harsher measures including razing the homes of Palestinians responsible." Similar to Nazi tactics. Whole family punished for actions of one family member? Is that justice and fairness? Israel likes to play the victim card, but they are being persecutors in reality.

No, it is not like the Nazis, that's you baiting. If it was anything like the Nazis, there wouldn't be any Palestinians to oppress by now. Conquering armies do not always behave. If that was the point you tried to make with your OTT analogy, you could have picked another, less inflammatory example. As conquering armies go, by the way - the IDF is nowhere near as "bad" as some insist.

What's with the "victim card" mantra? The folks in the OP are enraged that their government doesn't kick some butt. More about anger than whining.

[Morch]

Israel is illegally occupying West Bank, has ignored UN telling them to withdraw, control with methods not all that different from Apartheid South Africa in the past. "harsher measures including razing the homes of Palestinians responsible." Similar to Nazi tactics. Whole family punished for actions of one family member? Is that justice and fairness? Israel likes to play the victim card, but they are being persecutors in reality.

You've got it all wrong.

Israel refuses to take the victim's role.

After thousands of years of being subject to persecution, pogroms, expulsions, and industrialized mass genocide, the Jews of the world have collectively decided ... been there, done that, NEVER AGAIN.

Now break it down.

Is Israel occupying the west bank? That's one narrative. The other is that there is no Palestinian nation to occupy so that's not what's happening.

Apartheid? Don't go there. It's the Palestinian side that wants a state with no Jews. Israel includes 20 percent Arab citizens.

Raising homes? I agree that it harsh. Seems to me to be a Middle Eastern thing. Israel is a nation in the middle east and clearly they have internalized a lot of the culture there beyond eating humous. Living in a very rough neighborhood ... what do you expect?

Nazi tactics? Dude, that makes me angry. Where are the death camps of the Arabs run by the Jews? There might be genocide in the Middle east happening now but it's Islam on Islam, not Jew on Arab. Arab population in the Gaza, Judea, and Samaria region has greatly INCREASED since Israel has been established. In my view, suggesting the lie that Israel is equivalent to Nazi Germany is an expression of anti-Jewish racist hate.

But you're right ... the Palestinians have legit grievances ... but the Israelis also have legit justifications to defend themselves.

The settlements ... well, some people think it's all about the settlements and if they all withdrew, peace would magically break out. I think people who think that are naive fools.

No I don't have any brilliant solutions.

I do no believe that there is a prerequisite of having a country for something to be termed an occupation. Regardless, in this case the area designated by the UN as the future Palestinian state was well defined. While it is true enough that the Palestinians rejected the offer, this by itself does not entail renouncing all rights, nor conferred any ownership rights to Israel. The same goes, by the way to the years of Egyptian and Jordanian occupation - which, naturally, are neatly tucked away from view.

Razing (was that one of the Freudian thingies?) houses is not an effective deterrent. It is received badly internationally and simply fuels the Palestinian narrative and agenda. And that's without saying much about it being plain wrong.

[Jingthing]

I was just describing the settler's movement narrative. I wasn't saying I agree with it. But it's obvious there is not yet an ACTUAL state of Palestine, U.N. game playing notwithstanding.

I also do not endorse the destruction of terrorist family homes but was pointing out that it's not realistic to expect Israel in that hot point region of conflict to behave as if they are Berkeley California.

Keep in mind the context of the post I was responding to ... basically yet another extremist Judeophobic rant suggest Israel is equivalent to Nazi Germany.

Edited October 7, 2015 by Jingthing

[konying]

Israel is illegally occupying West Bank, has ignored UN telling them to withdraw, control with methods not all that different from Apartheid South Africa in the past. "harsher measures including razing the homes of Palestinians responsible." Similar to Nazi tactics. Whole family punished for actions of one family member? Is that justice and fairness? Israel likes to play the victim card, but they are being persecutors in reality.

You've got it all wrong.

Israel refuses to take the victim's role.

After thousands of years of being subject to persecution, pogroms, expulsions, and industrialized mass genocide, the Jews of the world have collectively decided ... been there, done that, NEVER AGAIN.

Now break it down.

Is Israel occupying the west bank? That's one narrative. The other is that there is no Palestinian nation to occupy so that's not what's happening.

Apartheid? Don't go there. It's the Palestinian side that wants a state with no Jews. Israel includes 20 percent Arab citizens.

Raising homes? I agree that it harsh. Seems to me to be a Middle Eastern thing. Israel is a nation in the middle east and clearly they have internalized a lot of the culture there beyond eating humous. Living in a very rough neighborhood ... what do you expect?

Nazi tactics? Dude, that makes me angry. Where are the death camps of the Arabs run by the Jews? There might be genocide in the Middle east happening now but it's Islam on Islam, not Jew on Arab. Arab population in the Gaza, Judea, and Samaria region has greatly INCREASED since Israel has been established. In my view, suggesting the lie that Israel is equivalent to Nazi Germany is an expression of anti-Jewish racist hate.

But you're right ... the Palestinians have legit grievances ... but the Israelis also have legit justifications to defend themselves.

The settlements ... well, some people think it's all about the settlements and if they all withdrew, peace would magically break out. I think people who think that are naive fools.

No I don't have any brilliant solutions.

Just one question:

The people who set up the Jewish state in 1947 agreed on a specific area. By what mandate do the Israelis occupy more land AS THEIR OWN?

The EUROPEAN Jews were graciously given a place to call home despite it meaning many of the indigenous Arabs had to be evicted. Since then, they have taken more and more, every year, and displaced more and more of the indigenous natives.

Why is that condoned by any decent human being?

OK, that was 2 questions.

Hard to believe you would be posting such a question,because even half retarded idiot would know and understand, 3 wars STARTED by the Arabs gives Israel the right, just as it gives the right for British to occupy Australia.

If Israel did only 1/3 of what British did to Aborigines, there would not be a single arab in 1000 km radius,

[Morch]

Abbas thought he could start a religious war! With his false claims that Israel wanted to change the situation on the temple mount, That "Jews dirty" feet should not enter Al aqsa. It is pure religious hate against the jews.

It has backfired on him, but if anyone is to blame for this latest round of violence it is Abbas. So this isn't about Israel owning Judea and Samaria, or even about an arab state. It is about hate for Jews.

Abbas doesn't want a Palestinian homeland he wants war.

Abbas started it all,then? With all that popular support he commands among the Palestinian public? One word from him and their all off to riot? Right.

And a religious war, no less. Would that be because he wishes to strengthen Palestinian Islamic forces (like Hamas, Islamic Jihad) opposing him? Abbas might be many things, suicidal is not one of them.

As far as I am aware, no one of consequence on the Israeli side makes the claim that Abbas started the current round of hostilities or that he planned it. More an issue of publicly fanning the flames instead of doing his best to keep the calm. But then again, this is ignoring that Israeli leaders do the same, and that both Israeli and Palestinian leaders usually operate between the limits of their domestic politics and home crowd.

An Israeli minister defiantly breaking the law and standing agreements by publicly saying a prayer on the Temple Mount does very little to disabuse Muslim worshipers of certain OTT rumors doing the rounds regarding Israel's intentions. That there are rumors is a given, that's how Palestinian society is. Knowing that things are extra volatile, perhaps Netanyahu was ought to keep his buddy on a leash. Said minister was not even reprimanded let alone faced any consequences

Anyone proclaiming the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as being about one thing or another is usually missing the bigger picture - that it's multifaceted: cultural, religious, political, territorial just to name a few.

Worth noting that Abbas's first move after returning from the UN trip was to make a public announcement calling for calm, in instructing Palestinian security forces to cooperate with Israel. That must have cost him some pride, anguish and a whole lot of popular support.

[Jingthing]

Knifing terror attack near Tel Aviv today. I suppose that's "occupied" territory too, huh?

Edited October 7, 2015 by Jingthing

[Morch]

You've got it all wrong.

Israel refuses to take the victim's role.

After thousands of years of being subject to persecution, pogroms, expulsions, and industrialized mass genocide, the Jews of the world have collectively decided ... been there, done that, NEVER AGAIN.

Now break it down.

Is Israel occupying the west bank? That's one narrative. The other is that there is no Palestinian nation to occupy so that's not what's happening.

Apartheid? Don't go there. It's the Palestinian side that wants a state with no Jews. Israel includes 20 percent Arab citizens.

Raising homes? I agree that it harsh. Seems to me to be a Middle Eastern thing. Israel is a nation in the middle east and clearly they have internalized a lot of the culture there beyond eating humous. Living in a very rough neighborhood ... what do you expect?

Nazi tactics? Dude, that makes me angry. Where are the death camps of the Arabs run by the Jews? There might be genocide in the Middle east happening now but it's Islam on Islam, not Jew on Arab. Arab population in the Gaza, Judea, and Samaria region has greatly INCREASED since Israel has been established. In my view, suggesting the lie that Israel is equivalent to Nazi Germany is an expression of anti-Jewish racist hate.

But you're right ... the Palestinians have legit grievances ... but the Israelis also have legit justifications to defend themselves.

The settlements ... well, some people think it's all about the settlements and if they all withdrew, peace would magically break out. I think people who think that are naive fools.

No I don't have any brilliant solutions.

Is Israel occupying the West Bank? That's one narrative. The other is that there is no Palestinian nation to occupy so that's not what's happening.

Never mind the spurious "nation" bit. Simple question: What is Israel planning to do with the 2.5 million people who were already living in the West Bank when Israel occupied/captured it in 1967...many of them with homes there for centuries if not millenia. Give them equal citizenship if Israel decides to annex it, or employ some sort of logical contortionism to justify that a New York Jew somehow takes precedence in citizenship to a resident inhabitant that Israel has taken over and kick the Palestinian out of his home.

That's the nasty racist unjust side of Zionism that I object to.

What's your answer?

Apartheid? Don't go there. It's the Palestinian side that wants a state with no Jews. Israel includes 20 percent Arab citizens.

Well, neat as it may be for you to sweep the central issue under the carpet, but let us in fact go there, because that is the everyday situation under which West Bank Palestinians live right now. If Israel wants the West Bank for its own Jewish immigrants, what are they going to do with the existing Palestinian residents..grant them full citizenship or treat them as second class non residents or worse still ethnically cleanse them. Looks awfully like apartheid to me.

If Zionist squatters would like to pay for the land they are living on as uninvited guests that they have stolen from the Palestinian owners, fulfill the law abiding citizen police check, and have the full skills test requirement to be able to contribute to the future Palestinian economy, I am sure they would be most welcome.

There is no consensus in Israel regarding the West Bank or the Palestinians, hence the question regarding Israel's intentions on these matters can usually relate to specific instances of the conflict, current government actions and policies or the various ideological-political views of different parties.

As this is topic is about Israel's right wing, I will reiterate things posted on a parallel topic - the non-extreme Israeli right (and yes, that includes Netanyahu, for those unfamiliar with Israel political map), is somewhat in a state of denial as far reconciling ideology and reality goes. Most of their formulations do not provide a good enough answer neither to the Palestinians nor to Israelis. Those forces and parties (some are current coalition partners) which stand to the right of Netanyahu are more willing to go the extra mile as far as total disregard for international conventions and public opinion. Their formulations tend to be variations on "God will provide". Despite the right wing gradual shift to more extreme positions (which Netanyahu unwittingly facilitated through internal power struggles), the current government can be counted upon to back down form the brink. Chalk it up for Netanyahu's aversion from decisive moves, or to the loons not (yet) running the asylum.

The short version - there is no clear answer.

Interestingly enough, and often glossed over by known participants, even Netanyahu's opposition is not that clear on how an actual resolution will look like, when it comes to details. The other side of the same, is that the Palestinians themselves are not unified on many of the key issues (and that's without even getting to the conveniently dismissed rift between Fatah and Hamas).

The only thing in common to all factions on both sides seems to be the use of slogans and simplified notions - matching them up to real conditions is another matter.

Things are not helped much by spreading OTT diatribe such as "many of them with homes there for centuries if not millenia" - Not aware anyone around these can trace family ancestry and home ownership a 1000 years back. Centuries is over the top as well, perhaps for a few, certainly not many. In the same vein, not all Israelis are newly arrived immigrants from New York. Pitting one inaccurate statement against another does not a sound argument make.

The same goes for that old favorite Apartheid argument. It must be tempting for some to dub Israel as a South-Africa-like-apartheid-state by focusing on a specific facet of reality. The fact that things are somewhat more complex is ignored or sidelines as irrelevant. So let's try once more, for futility's sake: If Israel was an apartheid state, there wouldn't be any Arab members of parliament, Arabic would not be an official language and Arabs could not hold citizenship. Granted, this applies to Arab Israelis (or as some would term, Palestinians Arabs living within Israel....whatever), and not to the Palestinians residing in the occupied territories. Granted also that there is a measure of discrimination against Arab citizens of Israel (although not as quite as horrid as some on this forum try to paint through posting the same old links). Does it make Israel a model state? By no means. Does it conform to the apartheid tagline? not quite.

Pointing fingers at instances of racism on the part of Israel does not change the fact that this is quite rampant among Palestinians. And no, despite the expressed confidence, selling land to Jews is pretty much taboo (to a certain degree, a legal one) among Palestinians, and citizenship may not be conferred upon them. As far as I am aware, there is no provision in agreements discussed or signed for Israelis to live under Palestinian rule.

The crux of both issues addressed in this post is that things usually more complex than simplified answers, over the top rhetoric, or slogans can capture. For many this is confusing, unsatisfactory and negates the absolute lines which makes life easier. The hyper vilifying of the other side seems an essential component for that warm self-righteous feeling, while developing a healthy sized blind spot to certain unflattering aspects of the supported side.

[Morch]

Those slingshots/catapults and whatever they are firing, can kill and maim.

I would have no problem responding with a rifle.

I have no doubt you wouldn't. QED. That is the whole essence of the debate...people like you, or people who will calm the situation down, end the cycle of violence and save lives on both sides

Taking TVF, far removed as it is from events, to be an analogy of the conflict and discussing the conflict between the sides - how does the rhetoric often employed in many of the posts (including yours, not necessarily the one above) facilitates a calmer atmosphere, and less verbal violence?

In very much the same way, fiery words by leaders of both sides, vilification of the other, denial of any wrong done - contribute mostly to increase animosity, rather than promote chances for understanding.

[Morch]

Just one question:

The people who set up the Jewish state in 1947 agreed on a specific area. By what mandate do the Israelis occupy more land AS THEIR OWN?

The EUROPEAN Jews were graciously given a place to call home despite it meaning many of the indigenous Arabs had to be evicted. Since then, they have taken more and more, every year, and displaced more and more of the indigenous natives.

Why is that condoned by any decent human being?

OK, that was 2 questions.

Israel did not have an international mandate to take over any additional land, and I do not think anyone made such a claim.

In a similar vein, Israel's Arab neighbors and the Palestinians did not have an international mandate to declare war on the newly formed Israel, essentially aimed at nullifying Israel's international mandate to create a state. No complaints, reservations, or objections expressed on that issue.

In the aftermath of the war, the areas originally designated for the Palestinian state, and that remained unconquered by Israel, were still quite a significant territory. Rather than setting up a Palestinian state, the areas in question became occupied by Egypt and Jordan, with the no real Palestinian representation in the ceasefire talks, Jordan proceeded annex the West Bank, while Egypt maintained a tight control over Gaza (a Palestinian puppet regime was installed for a while) - this was the state of things until the 1967 war, which ended with Israel gaining control over said territories. There was no international mandate for either, and the Jordan annexation move was rejected even by the Arab League. No complaints, reservations, or objections expressed on that issue.

[dexterm]

Not aware anyone around these can trace family ancestry and home ownership a 1000 years back.

Zionist Jews who colonized Palestine displacing the resident population seemed to have no trouble in doing so.

As usual,Morch, you sit on the fence, just quote this side, that side, and conclude it's all a very difficult complex questiom. Lets leave it in the too hard basket for now. I think after 48 years of occupation and negotiations young Palestinians are venting their frustrations since there doesn't seem to be any hope for the future for them.

I would be very interested to hear what you think ought to happen to the 2.5 million Palestinians in the West Bank

1....two state solution based on the 67 borders

2... one state solution with Palestinians as equal citizens

3... one state solution with Palestinian as resident aliens (apartheid)

4... one state solution with Palestinians ethnically cleansed to Jordan and Egypt.

IMO I think 1. and 2. are the only viable solutions for a permanent peace. But perhaps you have some other ideas...some sort of confederation of 2 states maybe.

I would very much like to know what you think would be a peaceful resolution of the conflict as well as some of the main stumbling blocks... Jerusalem the biggest I suppose.

[Morch]

Not aware anyone around these can trace family ancestry and home ownership a 1000 years back.

Zionist Jews who colonized Palestine displacing the resident population seemed to have no trouble in doing so.

As usual,Morch, you sit on the fence, just quote this side, that side, and conclude it's all a very difficult complex questiom. Lets leave it in the too hard basket for now. I think after 48 years of occupation and negotiations young Palestinians are venting their frustrations since there doesn't seem to be any hope for the future for them.

I would be very interested to hear what you think ought to happen to the 2.5 million Palestinians in the West Bank

1....two state solution based on the 67 borders

2... one state solution with Palestinians as equal citizens

3... one state solution with Palestinian as resident aliens (apartheid)

4... one state solution with Palestinians ethnically cleansed to Jordan and Egypt.

IMO I think 1. and 2. are the only viable solutions for a permanent peace. But perhaps you have some other ideas...some sort of confederation of 2 states maybe.

I would very much like to know what you think would be a peaceful resolution of the conflict as well as some of the main stumbling blocks... Jerusalem the biggest I suppose.

Once again having trouble quoting posts? That was probably the least relevant line there.

Just to make things clear - "anyone" was intended as including those of Jewish ancestry. Anyone familiar with my posts will note that they do not feature promises by God, and not much by way justification through ancient history.

As usual, some are obsessed with taking sides. Apologies if I do not subscribe to the playground mentality of "either with us or against us". Part of growing up is to realize that the world is not painted black and white. Further apologies if this makes it harder for some to maintain their illusions and self-righteous stance. Indeed, most issues related to this conflict are complex, not my doing, such is life. I choose to resist the temptation to put them all in neat and tagged little boxes, to be copy/pasted on each related topic, Same goes for fiery words and liberal use of negative descriptions.

Please refrain from attributing to me things I have not expressed. Nowhere did I post anything along the lines of "Lets leave it in the too hard basket for now". That some imagine, probably through any significant lack of first hand experience, things could be resolved in a swift manner, does not make it so. Acknowledging that there are serious difficulties on the way to finding a solution, or that present conditions seem to preclude a near future outcome, is more a description of reality, not a personal preference.

Once again, anyone who reads my posts (as I know you do), can figure out that, ideally, a two state solution would be the best resolution to the conflict. However, that the future Palestinian state will be a bit short on certain features of sovereignty is almost a given (which considering how things are presented nowadays, will lead to no end of trouble). If memory serves, there were two occasions (on this forum) in which I bothered with lengthy posts detailing possible outlines for such a solution. From what I recall, the comments were one-liners plus asserting that I do not see the forest for the trees. From there things moved back (evidently) to the same old mud slinging. You are welcome to look them up.

The geographical stumbling blocks are immaterial, in the sense that there will always be something to disagree about.. As time passes by the main obstacles are not features which could be manipulated - borders, settlements, security arrangements, infrastructure and economies. - but how the two sides relate to each other. The ongoing provocations from both sides, which are real enough, make changing attitudes and perceptions very difficult by themselves. The constant accompanying chorus that inevitably follows each incident and loads it up with all past wrongs - reminding each side of how evil the other is, while glorifying "our" purity - takes over reality and gains an existence of its own. Nobody wants to win the hearts and mind of demons, nobody wants demons to win his heart and mind.

[dexterm]

Not aware anyone around these can trace family ancestry and home ownership a 1000 years back.

Zionist Jews who colonized Palestine displacing the resident population seemed to have no trouble in doing so.

As usual,Morch, you sit on the fence, just quote this side, that side, and conclude it's all a very difficult complex questiom. Lets leave it in the too hard basket for now. I think after 48 years of occupation and negotiations young Palestinians are venting their frustrations since there doesn't seem to be any hope for the future for them.

I would be very interested to hear what you think ought to happen to the 2.5 million Palestinians in the West Bank

1....two state solution based on the 67 borders

2... one state solution with Palestinians as equal citizens

3... one state solution with Palestinian as resident aliens (apartheid)

4... one state solution with Palestinians ethnically cleansed to Jordan and Egypt.

IMO I think 1. and 2. are the only viable solutions for a permanent peace. But perhaps you have some other ideas...some sort of confederation of 2 states maybe.

I would very much like to know what you think would be a peaceful resolution of the conflict as well as some of the main stumbling blocks... Jerusalem the biggest I suppose.

Once again having trouble quoting posts? That was probably the least relevant line there.

Just to make things clear - "anyone" was intended as including those of Jewish ancestry. Anyone familiar with my posts will note that they do not feature promises by God, and not much by way justification through ancient history.

As usual, some are obsessed with taking sides. Apologies if I do not subscribe to the playground mentality of "either with us or against us". Part of growing up is to realize that the world is not painted black and white. Further apologies if this makes it harder for some to maintain their illusions and self-righteous stance. Indeed, most issues related to this conflict are complex, not my doing, such is life. I choose to resist the temptation to put them all in neat and tagged little boxes, to be copy/pasted on each related topic, Same goes for fiery words and liberal use of negative descriptions.

Please refrain from attributing to me things I have not expressed. Nowhere did I post anything along the lines of "Lets leave it in the too hard basket for now". That some imagine, probably through any significant lack of first hand experience, things could be resolved in a swift manner, does not make it so. Acknowledging that there are serious difficulties on the way to finding a solution, or that present conditions seem to preclude a near future outcome, is more a description of reality, not a personal preference.

Once again, anyone who reads my posts (as I know you do), can figure out that, ideally, a two state solution would be the best resolution to the conflict. However, that the future Palestinian state will be a bit short on certain features of sovereignty is almost a given (which considering how things are presented nowadays, will lead to no end of trouble). If memory serves, there were two occasions (on this forum) in which I bothered with lengthy posts detailing possible outlines for such a solution. From what I recall, the comments were one-liners plus asserting that I do not see the forest for the trees. From there things moved back (evidently) to the same old mud slinging. You are welcome to look them up.

The geographical stumbling blocks are immaterial, in the sense that there will always be something to disagree about.. As time passes by the main obstacles are not features which could be manipulated - borders, settlements, security arrangements, infrastructure and economies. - but how the two sides relate to each other. The ongoing provocations from both sides, which are real enough, make changing attitudes and perceptions very difficult by themselves. The constant accompanying chorus that inevitably follows each incident and loads it up with all past wrongs - reminding each side of how evil the other is, while glorifying "our" purity - takes over reality and gains an existence of its own. Nobody wants to win the hearts and mind of demons, nobody wants demons to win his heart and mind.

You hint that a two state solution would be best. Thanks for that. You are the first Israeli supporter on this forum who has ever come even close to suggesting a permanent solution. All I have ever heard from the esteemed members is the old chestnuts tantamount to deporting 4.5 million Palestinian residents to the Jordanian and Egyptian borders. Which of course would not be a permanent solution...not that the global community would even think for one second of allowing that. Yet that is the solution most of the present Israeli cabinet posit.

The two-state solution is dead

Just ask Israel's own ministers.

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2015/05/state-palestine-israel-zionist-150527070943455.html

What is frustrating for an onlooker like myself is that the parties have come so tantalisingly close to a peace agreement twice already, at Camp David in 2000 and the Olmert plan in 2008. I have many times on this forum suggested a deal very similar to Olmerts and Barak's. I hope one day Israeli voters are not spooked into electing an inveterate war mongering like Netanyahu, and actually seriously consider what sort of future they want Israel to have...a permanent peace and prosperity, or conflict management and forever looking over their shoulders.

Most of my posts on tvf are quite conciliatory, but if I see evil perpetrated I will publish the culprits. In the present conflict shooting a 13 year old child with live ammunition is evil IMO when so many other non lethal alternative crowd dispersants are available.

It seems to me that the IDF or the politicians giving the orders wanted blood to be spilt to assuage their electorate or their own bloodlust. IMO Netanyahu's current cabinet fulfill those criteria. They are not concerned about calming the situation down; they are pushing their own racist agenda.

Evil triumphs when good men do nothing.

Edited October 8, 2015 by dexterm

[Morch]

Not aware anyone around these can trace family ancestry and home ownership a 1000 years back.

Zionist Jews who colonized Palestine displacing the resident population seemed to have no trouble in doing so.

As usual,Morch, you sit on the fence, just quote this side, that side, and conclude it's all a very difficult complex questiom. Lets leave it in the too hard basket for now. I think after 48 years of occupation and negotiations young Palestinians are venting their frustrations since there doesn't seem to be any hope for the future for them.

I would be very interested to hear what you think ought to happen to the 2.5 million Palestinians in the West Bank

1....two state solution based on the 67 borders

2... one state solution with Palestinians as equal citizens

3... one state solution with Palestinian as resident aliens (apartheid)

4... one state solution with Palestinians ethnically cleansed to Jordan and Egypt.

IMO I think 1. and 2. are the only viable solutions for a permanent peace. But perhaps you have some other ideas...some sort of confederation of 2 states maybe.

I would very much like to know what you think would be a peaceful resolution of the conflict as well as some of the main stumbling blocks... Jerusalem the biggest I suppose.

Once again having trouble quoting posts? That was probably the least relevant line there.

Just to make things clear - "anyone" was intended as including those of Jewish ancestry. Anyone familiar with my posts will note that they do not feature promises by God, and not much by way justification through ancient history.

As usual, some are obsessed with taking sides. Apologies if I do not subscribe to the playground mentality of "either with us or against us". Part of growing up is to realize that the world is not painted black and white. Further apologies if this makes it harder for some to maintain their illusions and self-righteous stance. Indeed, most issues related to this conflict are complex, not my doing, such is life. I choose to resist the temptation to put them all in neat and tagged little boxes, to be copy/pasted on each related topic, Same goes for fiery words and liberal use of negative descriptions.

Please refrain from attributing to me things I have not expressed. Nowhere did I post anything along the lines of "Lets leave it in the too hard basket for now". That some imagine, probably through any significant lack of first hand experience, things could be resolved in a swift manner, does not make it so. Acknowledging that there are serious difficulties on the way to finding a solution, or that present conditions seem to preclude a near future outcome, is more a description of reality, not a personal preference.

Once again, anyone who reads my posts (as I know you do), can figure out that, ideally, a two state solution would be the best resolution to the conflict. However, that the future Palestinian state will be a bit short on certain features of sovereignty is almost a given (which considering how things are presented nowadays, will lead to no end of trouble). If memory serves, there were two occasions (on this forum) in which I bothered with lengthy posts detailing possible outlines for such a solution. From what I recall, the comments were one-liners plus asserting that I do not see the forest for the trees. From there things moved back (evidently) to the same old mud slinging. You are welcome to look them up.

The geographical stumbling blocks are immaterial, in the sense that there will always be something to disagree about.. As time passes by the main obstacles are not features which could be manipulated - borders, settlements, security arrangements, infrastructure and economies. - but how the two sides relate to each other. The ongoing provocations from both sides, which are real enough, make changing attitudes and perceptions very difficult by themselves. The constant accompanying chorus that inevitably follows each incident and loads it up with all past wrongs - reminding each side of how evil the other is, while glorifying "our" purity - takes over reality and gains an existence of its own. Nobody wants to win the hearts and mind of demons, nobody wants demons to win his heart and mind.

You hint that a two state solution would be best. Thanks for that. You are the first Israeli supporter on this forum who has ever come even close to suggesting a permanent solution. All I have ever heard from the esteemed members is the old chestnuts tantamount to deporting 4.5 million Palestinian residents to the Jordanian and Egyptian borders. Which of course would not be a permanent solution...not that the global community would even think for one second of allowing that. Yet that is the solution most of the present Israeli cabinet posit.

The two-state solution is dead

Just ask Israel's own ministers.

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2015/05/state-palestine-israel-zionist-150527070943455.html

What is frustrating for an onlooker like myself is that the parties have come so tantalisingly close to a peace agreement twice already, at Camp David in 2000 and the Olmert plan in 2008. I have many times on this forum suggested a deal very similar to Olmerts and Barak's. I hope one day Israeli voters are not spooked into electing an inveterate war mongering like Netanyahu, and actually seriously consider what sort of future they want Israel to have...a permanent peace and prosperity, or conflict management and forever looking over their shoulders.

Most of my posts on tvf are quite conciliatory, but if I see evil perpetrated I will publish the culprits. In the present conflict shooting a 13 year old child with live ammunition is evil IMO when so many other non lethal alternative crowd dispersants are available.

It seems to me that the IDF or the politicians giving the orders wanted blood to be spilt to assuage their electorate or their own bloodlust. IMO Netanyahu's current cabinet fulfill those criteria. They are not concerned about calming the situation down; they are pushing their own racist agenda.

Evil triumphs when good men do nothing.

Why twist? I wasn't "hinting" at anything, but saying. Not for the first time, even. There are and there were others saying the same. On most topics it seem that if one does not fully accept a position, and shouts his pledge - no one pays attention. This is a good mirror image of reality, but not a very good one as images go.

Me mom used to say - you hear what you want to hear. Perhaps if some would lower their tone, everyone could hear a whole lot clearer.

As for the mandatory "they are evil" link - there were numerous statements that amount to the same from Palestinian leaders. Steadfast denial that there are anti peace forces on both sides will not silence them. Anyone who believes otherwise is either uninformed or biased by choice. Pick one.

The sides were not close to anything on 2000, and the same on 2008. This is myth, with "onlookers" refusing to accept that on neither occasion leaders could deliver as promised. There was simply not enough public support, and at leaders were not at the height of their popularity. It would have been a re-run of the Oslo Accords, and with more at stake, could have lead to outright disaster. The conflict will be resolved either when the two sides field strong leaderships, or when the public support will make leadership strength less of an issue. The former path seems hopeless, considering the current and near future crop, the latter hampered by things discussed in the previous post (re: how sides relate to each other),

The usual one sided reference made to the Israel public electoral choices is just more of that healthy sized blind spot. The Israeli public does not go to vote in a vacuum, there is a tangible reality out there, and it ain't pretty. The vacuum they meet is more to do with opposition leadership - alternating between irrelevant, ridicules and non-existent. The notion that if the opposition manages, somehow, to achieve an electoral victory, the conflict will be on its speedy way to resolution is another myth. One which was discussed in length on quite a few topics here. And of course, no mention of the Palestinian public, whatsoever. This is probably the most bizarre "onlooker" stance - why not call on the Palestinian public to get an alternative leadership (not to say, a unified one) and give it the support to make peace? My guess would be that the reality simply does not fit with the way "onlookers" portray the Palestinian society.

Your posts almost always contain inflammatory elements, are almost always one-sided in the extreme, and what with the ever present denouncing tone, do not encourage a dialogue. Most of it comes across as a constant stream of biased copy/pasted propaganda aimed at point scoring. Take your next lines, for example: Shooting a 13yo Palestinian boy is evil. A day earlier, it seemed quite legit that a 2yo Israeli and his Mom were hurt on another attack, (in which two others were killed) with comments ranging from decreeing it the victim's fault, the murderer's (sorry - boy, slipped) family facing a horrible future, and grumbling over calling the 2yo Israeli settler a "toddler". So basically, it is not about evil, it is about evil directed at one of the sides only.

It seems to me that the insistence to display biased ignorance toward how things "work" when it comes to Israeli politics is getting old. Attempting to create the notion that "politicians" handed ordered the IDF for "blood to be split to assuage their electorate or their own bloodlust" is nothing but a variation on blood libel.

There is absolutely no mention, whatsoever, of the numerous terrorists attacks by Palestinians the last couple of days, not a word regarding violent rioting, and not a sound regarding incitement among the Palestinians,

Try this for size, switch all reference to Israel in your posts to another country. Check if still sounds "quite conciliatory".

[dexterm]

Sorry thread full. Read directly above previous discussion.

I say "hint" because you don't seem to be able to call a spade a spade.

Once again, anyone who reads my posts (as I know you do), can figure out that, ideally, a two state solution would be the best resolution to the conflict. However, that the future Palestinian state will be a bit short on certain features of sovereignty is almost a given (which considering how things are presented nowadays, will lead to no end of trouble).

Your verbosity sometimes bordering on gobbledegook masks what you want to say. Seriously...try writing in shorter plain sentences without so many "ifs..whereas..however..on the other hand." I read your pieces sometimes 2 or 3 times, and in the end I am exasperated because I feel you have said absolutely nothing definitive. Not always though. I admired your integrity and honesty the other day when you firmly and eloquently corrected the oft repeated chestnut about there never was a Palestinian nation, so that's a reason for there never being one etc etc.

I am not aware of a single other Israeli apologist on this forum who has ever supported the 2 state solution roughly along the 67 lines. Speak up now whoever you are please.

I have listened to all the parties concerned with the 2000 Camp David summit. I disagree with you. I think they were very close to a deal. If Clinton had stayed a few days longer to cajole and bang heads together I think it would have happened. When possibilities are placed in the electorate's minds, maybe they are rejected the first time, but they have been presented to be taken seriously. The simple stating of a possibility evolves a life of its own.

I thought Herzog may have been the catalyst for peace in the last election. He may have been but for Netanyahu and his racist "The Arabs are coming" call to summon the right wing zealots out to vote. At least he could see that there was no future for Zionism in a one state solution hence his party's name.

It is sad when any child loses a parent unnecessarily. But I have no sympathy for IDF soldiers getting killed in occupied territory , nor Israeli squatters complicit by their very presence in occupied territory. They know precisely the risks when they voted with their feet to steal someone else's land. But spare me the pathos. Google images ... children dead Gaza.

I will never apologize for saying it is evil to kill with live ammunition a 13 year old boy who was part of a stone throwing crowd..reports suggest his death was accidental...that's even worse i.e IDF were firing indiscriminately with live rounds. Countries who regard themselves as modern civilized democracies don't behave that way.

Attempting to create the notion that "politicians" handed ordered the IDF for "blood to be split to assuage their electorate or their own bloodlust" is nothing but a variation on blood libel.

Netanyahu and his cabinet of right wing fanatics recently voted for the use of live ammunition to be used against stone throwers. They didn't discuss the possible increased use of water cannons, tear gas, pepper spray, rubber bullets, dye or foul smelling odor sprays. They opted for the most lethal solution. That is bloodlust in my book.

Netanyahu and his cabinet up the ante every time. They have an agenda ... I fear it is to provoke another round of increased ethnic cleansing. Albeit a dopey counter productive one, it is deliberate.

Edited October 8, 2015 by dexterm

[Morch]

Sorry thread full. Read directly above previous discussion.

I say "hint" because you don't seem to be able to call a spade a spade.

Your verbosity sometimes bordering on gobbledegook masks what you want to say. Seriously...try writing in shorter plain sentences without so many "ifs..whereas..however..on the other hand." I read your pieces sometimes 2 or 3 times, and in the end I am exasperated because I feel you have said absolutely nothing definitive. Not always though. I admired your integrity and honesty the other day when you firmly and eloquently corrected the oft repeated chestnut about there never was a Palestinian nation, so that's a reason for there never being one etc etc.

I am not aware of a single other Israeli apologist on this forum who has ever supported the 2 state solution roughly along the 67 lines. Speak up now whoever you are please.

I have listened to all the parties concerned with the 2000 Camp David summit. I disagree with you. I think they were very close to a deal. If Clinton had stayed a few days longer to cajole and bang heads together I think it would have happened. When possibilities are placed in the electorate's minds, maybe they are rejected the first time, but they have been presented to be taken seriously. The simple stating of a possibility evolves a life of its own.

I thought Herzog may have been the catalyst for peace in the last election. He may have been but for Netanyahu and his racist "The Arabs are coming" call to summon the right wing zealots out to vote. At least he could see that there was no future for Zionism in a one state solution hence his party's name.

It is sad when any child loses a parent unnecessarily. But I have no sympathy for IDF soldiers getting killed in occupied territory , nor Israeli squatters complicit by their very presence in occupied territory. They know precisely the risks when they voted with their feet to steal someone else's land. But spare me the pathos. Google images ... children dead Gaza.

I will never apologize for saying it is evil to kill with live ammunition a 13 year old boy who was part of a stone throwing crowd..reports suggest his death was accidental...that's even worse i.e IDF were firing indiscriminately with live rounds. Countries who regard themselves as modern civilized democracies don't behave that way.

Netanyahu and his cabinet of right wing fanatics recently voted for the use of live ammunition to be used against stone throwers. They didn't discuss the possible increased use of water cannons, tear gas, pepper spray, rubber bullets, dye or foul smelling odor sprays. They opted for the most lethal solution. That is bloodlust in my book.

Netanyahu and his cabinet up the ante every time. They have an agenda ... I fear it is to provoke another round of increased ethnic cleansing. Albeit a dopey counter productive one, it is deliberate.

Finding two example to refute the nonsense claims took a couple of minutes. The first quote from a post by yourself, the second quote a replay to you by another poster:

Thank you, Morch, for your well considered practical implementation of a solution to the conflict.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/785296-israel-dismisses-palestinian-peace-deal-plan-as-gimmick/?p=8828938

By the way, I have been arguing since the 1970s

השטחים הם לא שלנו

(The territories are not ours)

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/860846-israeli-army-shoots-two-palestinian-teenagers-dead/?p=9944151

I get that some people need the reality to be dished in little bits, compartmentalized neatly into little boxes. Much easier to follow catch phrases, slogans, and over simplified formulations rather than accept that things are not always clear cut as we would like them to be.

Disagree all you want, it matters naught. The difficulties were less with the negotiations themselves, but rather with the lack of public support. Barak's shaky coalition was already crumbling at the time. He could not deliver, and Arafat was not to keen to tango anyway. A peace made between leaders is as strong as the leaders are. Once again, neglecting any reference to the Palestinian public opinion.

Your misguided opinion on the last elections is dully noted. Netanyahu would have won the elections anyway, there are quite a lot of hindsight articles detailing the polls failure to capture that. In the Israeli political system, it is not mandatory for the largest party to form the coalition, the role is usually given to whomever is deemed having the best chances of forming one (for reference, look up the 2009 elections). Herzog coalition options were very limited, and unlikely that it would have been able to effectively promote much by way of conflict resolution. Not aware that the party name had to do with the your interpretation, most times it was considered to be aimed at lending the party a more centrist outlook.

The point made on the previous post is that you (and granted, posters with opposing positions) are unable to acknowledge wrong done by your adopted side. Everything is justified by placing the responsibility with the other side, nothing to be conceded. It is always the same old - they are evil, look what they are doing to us. Nevermind our side's actions, that's a response for what they did to us before. Sorry if I don't see it as a competition and tally keeping of who suffers more.

I seriously doubt that you have access to Israeli cabinet discussion minutes, so your assertions as to what was considered are baseless. Anyone bothering to actually read the news would have noticed that most of the operational elements were suggested by the police and other security agencies. Furthermore,the use of live ammunition against rock throwers was in place before. The new addendum is an expansion of the former regulation to include situation where the clear and present danger is directed at others than the officer.

It might be bloodlust you your book, but methinks your book slowly comes to resemble certain notorious protocols. The usual "ethnic cleansing" nonsense will no doubt be followed by asserting that time if on the demographics and time are on the Palestinians side.

Netanyahu and (some) of his coalition partners are not entirely of the same mind when it comes to dealing with the Palestinians. If some have trouble coming to terms with it, have another read of the OP (and related articles). Currently, Netanyau gets a lot of flak from right wing parties, to the degree that talk of forming an alternative coalition is in the air again.

[dexterm]

Sorry, thread full.

Morch, I apologize for not recalling your outline last year of a 2 state solution.

The other link you quote was only posted today. I must have overlooked it because the poster called me an anti semite, as do you..please do not do so.

I make no apologies for pointing out the evil committed by the IDF in recent weeks such as the shooting in the back by an IDF colonel of a stone throwing teenager running away after he cracked his windscreen and he and his fully armed soldiers "felt their lives were in danger!"...the new carte blanche get out of jail card for the iDF, or, as you euphemistically call it, "a new addendum" to existing regulations. There is more background to the present unrest as you well know. B'Tselem produce a comprehensive list of all Palestinians killed by the IDF so far this year. And that is not counting the daily thuggery of Jewish squatter price tag terrorists..no arrests or parents homes demolished there I notice.

Quote

Everything is justified by placing the responsibility with the other side, nothing to be conceded.

Precisely. That is because Israel and the IDF do bear the responsibility. They are the ones occupying 4.5 million Palestinians on the West Bank and Gaza. Why should the Palestinians continue co-operating with the invader when they have been stalling serious peace negotiations for the last 48 years. Israel is the one with all the power. Netanyahu and his cabinet could put a dampener on all this violence tomorrow by announcing a moratorium on Jewish visits to Al Aqsa until things calm down, and a moratorium on settlement building as a goodwill gesture to get the peace talks rolling again....what have they got to lose..but a few surveyors pegs. Instead of that some of his ministers want to defy his ban, visit Haram al Sharif and stir up more trouble. Just as Sharon did 15 years ago in order to successfully derail any peace process.

It is this intransigence that makes me distrustful of Netanyahu and what he and his cabinet plan next. I followed all his lies in the conflict last year. He is very much a Janus.

Edited October 9, 2015 by dexterm

[Scott]

Off-topic posts and replies removed.

[cooked]

Not aware anyone around these can trace family ancestry and home ownership a 1000 years back.

Zionist Jews who colonized Palestine displacing the resident population seemed to have no trouble in doing so.

As usual,Morch, you sit on the fence, just quote this side, that side, and conclude it's all a very difficult complex questiom. Lets leave it in the too hard basket for now. I think after 48 years of occupation and negotiations young Palestinians are venting their frustrations since there doesn't seem to be any hope for the future for them.

I would be very interested to hear what you think ought to happen to the 2.5 million Palestinians in the West Bank

1....two state solution based on the 67 borders

2... one state solution with Palestinians as equal citizens

3... one state solution with Palestinian as resident aliens (apartheid)

4... one state solution with Palestinians ethnically cleansed to Jordan and Egypt.

IMO I think 1. and 2. are the only viable solutions for a permanent peace. But perhaps you have some other ideas...some sort of confederation of 2 states maybe.

I would very much like to know what you think would be a peaceful resolution of the conflict as well as some of the main stumbling blocks... Jerusalem the biggest I suppose.

You have of course forgotten the solution that is being proposed pretty universally by the Islamists: kill ALL the Jews. That's what they want.

Abbas (who himself only knows hate as a motivation for trying to destroy Israel.He isn't looking for a peaceful solution) and Hamas are hated by most Palestinians. They are corrupt, take most of the money sent by the UNO not for building as new infrastructure but for preparing to annihilate Israel.

Quote: "For further proof of the religious intolerance lets look at Hamas’s Charter and what Mahmoud Abbas said to the UN in his speech for a Palestinian State. Hamas’s stated goal is to wipe Israel and its Jews off the map, just like Iran wants to do… Abbas wants the State of Palestine to be “Jew free”. From http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_faq_palestine_un_anti_israel_bias.php

There is no solution as long as Palestinians are brought up in an atmosphere of hate and blaming the Jews for everything. If and when Palestine does finish with Israel, they will turn around after 20 years of ruining what was Israel and start to look for new scape goats.