Death toll mounts in Israel and the Palestinian territories

[thaibeachlovers]

Well.....even I, with zero experience in statesmanship, can tell you that the only way this ends will be when one of them goes.

And your suggestion is..................................

[dexterm]

The mainstream media press coverage on this latest wave of Palestinian terrorism has been quite biased against Israel. The stories usually lead with words like Israelis shoot Palestinian in the headline and then you have to get into the story to read why ... that they were shooting an actual murderous terrorist that had already seriously injured or killed some random Jewish people. Recent event ... two Palestinian teens 13 and 17 critically injured a 13 year old Jewish boy (the terrorist stabbed him almost a dozen times) and seriously injured a 24 year old Jewish man. One of the terrorists was shot dead and the other is receiving world class medical care at an Israeli hospital. I hope he survives to rot in jail.

Just a sample of the kind of thing that is happening there DAILY.

It's OK to report these events but the leads should really be about the terrorist acts that necessitated a reaction.

Of course the international media are negative towards Israel. Israel is the occupier and invader. They are the bullies.They hold all the peace cards and all the heavy weapons.

Why does the Israeli cabinet approve live ammunition against stone throwers. It is pouring gas on the fire rather than calming things down.

What was the crime warranting the death sentence for 9 Palestinians including a 12 year old, murdered by sadistic IDF, when Gazan demonstrators rolled burning tires towards the border fence behind which the IDF in all their body armor and vehicles were safe. Where were the rubber bullets, water cannons, tear gas, pepper spray.... That way you dont create martyrs; that way you don't escalate the situation...unless you actually want to.

This negative PR could be a foretaste of what might happen if Israel tried something even more sinister.

The tide of public opinion has turned against Israel. More people globally are now aware of the great Israeli hoax: play the victim, when you are in fact the aggressor.

It is not so much a question of international press giving Israel a bad time, as it glosses over Palestinian violence.

Despite the incessant posts to the contrary, the Palestinians are accountable for some of the violence. Despite the incessant posts proclaiming it, use of live ammunition against rock throwers was already approved when the current conflagration started.

The IDF actions in the Gaza border incidents were acknowledged and reviewed by Israel, and a different policy is temporarily in place - so far resulting in less casualties. All those anti-demonstration measures were not deployed, and the forces were not even briefed that such a demonstration would take place. As expected, you choose to interpret it as a secret Israeli plan to escalate the situation, while ignoring simpler and more probable explanations. Considering Israel's reactions after the casualty toll was realized it seems unlikely that this was an intended result.

The tide of public opinion turned against Israel years ago. That is no reason to celebrate biased and misleading reporting.

Who cares how old the legislation is. It's dumb and is counter productive.

I know if I were in a crowd of stone throwing protesters I would rather be hit by a rubber bullet, tear gas or water cannon than a live round. How about you?

That way I don't become a martyr, my bloodied teenage body going viral on the social media creating bad PR for Israel and have all my friends and family at my funeral next day seeking revenge.

My response here is actually to your other post regarding how to lower casualty rates. All this multiple thread quoting is sometimes confusing.

Edited October 15, 2015 by dexterm

[Johpa]

I agree that the Arabs are unlikely to have a change of heart, especially as they see Israel continue to steal their land ( would you accept that? ).

So, unless Israel makes a unilateral change, we will be having the same conversation in 10, 20, 30 years time.

I have noted many times that the establishment of settlements in the territories was/is wrong. Of course the settlements exacerbate the situation. And I have even stated my opinion that by 2015 standards the creation of the State of Israel would be wrong. But Israel was not created in 2015 and neither myself nor most adults alive today were around as adults in 1947/1948. We are in agreement on many points. But my whole argument is that even if Israel were to make a unilateral move, and perhaps it is worth the risk, the underlying "heart" in the Arab world that predates the settlements in the territories will not change and thus indeed we would/will be having this same conversation in 10 years or less. My sorrow is that I do not see an endgame. Both sides are in the wrong and I don't see a path out of the conundrum.

[dexterm]

Sorry thread full..

Morch wrote..

Making things up again, as usual.

The Palestinian did no such thing as you describe. First of all, there is no unified Palestinian leadership to deal with - one is partially willing but unable to deliver, the other (despite claims to the contrary) is not game. Second, Jerusalem was never the capital of any Palestine, according to the 1947 partition plan it was to be administered jointly under international supervision (not a very likely proposition to begin with). Third, the Right or Return being limited to include "a few geriatric Palestinians" is a not an official Palestinian position, and the same goes for replacing the Right of Return with compensation arrangements. Additionally, there is no forthcoming guarantee from anyone to pick the tab, and it does not solve the issue of Palestinians currently living in Arab countries, without citizenship.

The Palestinians and other Arab countries have indeed genuinely proposed peace deals in 2002 and 2007..they still stand, and Hamas have repeatedly offered indefinite truces.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Peace_Initiative

This excuse, we have no-one to negotiate with is baloney. Who on earth was John Kerry talking to for 9 montsh last year?

You misread what I wrote re Jerusalem because of my poor brackets punctuation ..sorry should read.."a small slice of Jerusalem (less than they had before) as their capital".

Quibbling over who would foot the compensation bill is the least problem..it would be chickenfeed for the world community, and a damned good investment for the world economy.For starters would save the EU having to rebuild schools and hospitals for Israel to demolish again.

[dexterm]

Morch says above (sorry thread full)

There is no one in a position of power in Israel calling for mass deportation of Palestinians, there is no general public support for that sort of thing as well. On top, Israel simply does not have the stomach to carry out something on that scale. Basically, it's just one of your standard propaganda red herring statements.

Here are just a few samples of the people in a position of power in Netanyahu's current cabinet on the issue of a 2 state solution.

Silvan Shalom, interior minister (Likud)

"We are all against a Palestinian state, there is no question about it."

Tzipi Hotovely, deputy foreign minister (Likud)

"This land is ours. All of it is ours"

Naftali Bennett, education minister (Jewish Home)

Aside from repeatedly comparing Palestinians to monkeys, Bennett - the former head of the Yesha Council, which represents Israel's illegal settlements - told the New Yorker in 2013: "I will do everything in my power to make sure they never get a state."

more from other cabinet members... (could only quote 3...fair usage)

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

My question is: if Netanyahu's current cabinet have ruled out a 2 state solution, mathematically we are left with a one state solution. What do they plan to do with the existing 2.5 million Palestinians in the West Bank?..deportation, equal citizenship or apartheid? Simple question.

Morch's other quote..

Curious to know how does Netanyahu's left wing opposition figure into this view of Zionism.

Zionism, yes even ZU's Herzog's variety, is racist. I do not believe that overseas Jews should take precedence in citizenship over the existing non Jewish population.I would like to see Israel become a secular state with perhaps a special proviso that it is always a haven for any persecuted Jewish refugees, and existing family reunions.

.

[dexterm]

Personally, I would much much rather that Israeli politicians worked out this obvious endgame scenario for themselves and avoid all this unnecessary violence.

As one who is relatively more knowledgeable of the region than most, I am quite impressed if you have come up with an "obvious endgame scenario" to the situation. I wholeheartedly agree that the expansion of settlements into the occupied territories was a major blunder, a huge political miscalculation on the part of the Likud, and simply wrong. But there still exists a sizable element within the Arab world that has long had, and still maintains but a single goal, and that is the destruction of the State of Israel. At some level, the expansion into the territories, the building of the wall of failure, the overreactions of force by the Israeli polity are all, to some degree, are but responses to the continuous existential threat that will not disappear if the Israelis withdraw to the 1967 borders. And thus, unless there is a substantial change in the Ummah of the Arab world, we would, given a withdrawal to earlier borders, to paraphrase of all people Hillary Clinton, be back here in 10 years having this same conversation. Given the miscalculations by the Israelis, given the miscalculations of the western powers throughout the region over the past century, I don't see the Arab Ummah moving towards any significant change of heart. I see no obvious endgame here. Sorry.

I say "obvious endgame" simply because most Israelis apart from some extremist fanatical settlers, do not want to live alongside Palestinians under occupation constantly looking over their shoulders wondering where the next knife attack is coming from.

So if they don't want to live with them, the obvious conclusion is to live without them... in 2 separate states, and to stop having the agenda dictated by the fanatical colonists in the West Bank.

Morch says above that he prefers a 2 state solution, as you have said so too, and he cannot see Israel mass deporting 2.5 million Palestinians in round 3 of ethnic cleansing. I have my doubts and am concerned that that is exactly what Netanyahu's cabinet have in mind in response to the present unrest. They may even have planned it this way.

As time marches on and occupation continues, the settlements increase, and so does the Palestinian population. Something has to give.

Any peace agreement would clearly have to address Israel's security concerns, and will not happen overnight. But this present unrest should be a wakeup call as to what the future will probably look like and that they should get together the sooner the better to discuss the finer details.

Edited October 15, 2015 by dexterm

[JHolmesJr]

Well.....even I, with zero experience in statesmanship, can tell you that the only way this ends will be when one of them goes.

And your suggestion is..................................

one of them has to go.

[Morch]

That's a very interesting question.

Israelis at the moment are worried Can we ever live with these people who want to kill us when we visit a shopping center in the Occupied Territories?.So what can they do about this?

1. Do as Netanyahu is doing..manage the status quo conflict, impose curfews and other draconian laws, but that's not a permanent solution.

2. Remove the problem. Remove 4.5 million resident Palestinians and make them other countries' problem, probably Europe's with another refugee influx crisis.That will not work either ...the world and the EU would not tolerate a 3rd round of Palestinian ethnic cleansing. besides it would not bring Israel permanent peace. the problem for Israeli security could always escalate into a world wide phenomenon.

3. Get out of the Occupied Territories to the safety of pre 67 borders. Yes I know some of the attacks have taken place there too, but with a recognized permanent peace agreement there would be no need for any attacks at all. notwithstanding there will always be disgruntled nutjobs on both sides.

Despite all the grief and tragedy on both sides, maybe the current round of violence is actuallly making something happen i.e. making Israelis realize there is no future for them in perpetuating the status quo. It has pushed forward their lackadaisical 48 year old agenda that they need to find a permanent solution.

Personally, I would much much rather that Israeli politicians worked out this obvious endgame scenario for themselves and avoid all this unnecessary violence.

Again with the same talking points?

There is no one in a position of power in Israel calling for mass deportation of Palestinians, there is no general public support for that sort of thing as well. On top, Israel simply does not have the stomach to carry out something on that scale. Basically, it's just one of your standard propaganda red herring statements.

There is currently no one in a position of power on both sides that can deliver a peace deal, and there is even more acute shortage of leaders willing to make the effort. Saying Israel "got all the cards" and similar slogans, ignores the fact that there cannot be a viable peace without either popular support or a determined strong leadership on the Palestinian side, neither in evidence. Unilaterally withdrawing does not work out all that great.

The current violence is a drop in the ocean compared with previous instances (the Intifadas, rocket attacks). Their long term effects on Israeli public opinion was to harden positions and develop a sense of fatalism regarding these bouts of violence. What can be seen now is an initial public reaction, if things will continue, more than likely people will simply adjust. Very unlikely that it would have the effect you imagine.

This ongoing presentation of the Palestinians as playing a passive role in the conflict resolution and as unaccountable for anything, is not helpful nor very respectful of the Palestinians.

Their long term effects on Israeli public opinion was to harden positions and develop a sense of fatalism regarding these bouts of violence. What can be seen now is an initial public reaction, if things will continue, more than likely people will simply adjust. Very unlikely that it would have the effect you imagine.

You seem not to take into account international pressure. Given sufficient provocation, even the US will not be able to justify unconditional support for Israel. Remember how apartheid was destroyed by international pressure forcing the US to turn against the Sth Africa clique.

quotes removed to allow posting

You seem not to take into account the point I was addressing - the effect of the Palestinian violence on Israeli public opinion.

The question raised earlier was how is the current Palestinian violence promoting their national aspirations? And the answer given was that it may bring about a change in Israeli views, more in line with Palestinian goals. The part you replied to relates to that.

I do not think that the current conflagration will bring it about a significantly increased amount of international pressure - provided violence does not escalate too much, and if the Israeli government refrains from certain moves (new illegal settlement, changing the status quo with regard to Temple Mount).

The timing is just wrong for this Intifada (if it matures into one, that is). The world got bigger fish to fry right now, not just in the Middle East. The Palestinian issue is simply not on top of the agenda, which was what Abbas's UN speech was all about. The US-Russia tension over Syria will raise Israel's stock in the short term, and some trends in European public opinion might also be less forthcoming to the Palestinians following the refugee/migrant crisis. It gets relatively less coverage even in Arab countries. Everyone got their own troubles.

Compared with the two previous Intifadas, it lacks the mass participation of the first, or the direct involvement of Fatah/Hamas (re: organization and weapons) as in the second. Most Palestinians are sitting this one out, less mass demonstrations than other times. People do have something to lose, despite it not being much, and there is a certain apprehension that riots getting out of hand could lead to anarchy - no one really wants that. The Fatah fears riots could lead to Hamas take over, Hamas fears an escalation would result in a re-run of last summer. So both movements express support on some level, but do not send in the troops, as it were.

[Morch]

Israel keeps doing the same thing expecting a different outcome. They never learn, its never their fault. Unable to look in the house of mirrors.

Just keep expanding settlements, need land for the chosen people. No one else matters.

What expansions of settlements is referred to in connection with the OP?

Netanyahu: Now is the time for unity government, not announcements of building in settlements

http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Netanyahu-The-Islamist-extremism-plaguing-the-Middle-East-has-arrived-at-Israels-doorstep-421367

Not mentioned in the linked article but appearing elsewhere, a ministerial committee meeting regarding legislation of further Palestinian land appropriation was cancelled, as timing seemed extra-inflammatory.

Speaking of doing the same thing over and over, while expecting different results - how is the current Palestinian violence promoting their national aspirations?

Not mentioned in the linked article but appearing elsewhere, a ministerial committee meeting regarding legislation of further Palestinian land appropriation was cancelled, as timing seemed extra-inflammatory.

You write that as if it were a good thing.

In fact it shows the Israeli government to be a bunch of crooks for even considering legislation to steal Palestinian land as though they have some right to it.

The aim of my post was to illustrate that there are, currently, no Israeli moves to expand illegal settlements as a "response" to the Palestinian violence. It was also aimed at highlighting that while Netanyahu is not interested in any meaningful compromise, he does not ignore international view on these matters.

The proposed legislation itself is a bad move. Not going through with it at this time, is relatively positive one. Not perfect, but at least not adding more fuel to the flames. Thought that anything contributing to lower tensions would be welcomed by those worried about the current violence.

There was nothing to say that Israeli appropriation of Palestinian lands is a good thing. My views on this are quite clear across multiple topics. Try harder.

[Morch]

Personally, I would much much rather that Israeli politicians worked out this obvious endgame scenario for themselves and avoid all this unnecessary violence.

As one who is relatively more knowledgeable of the region than most, I am quite impressed if you have come up with an "obvious endgame scenario" to the situation. I wholeheartedly agree that the expansion of settlements into the occupied territories was a major blunder, a huge political miscalculation on the part of the Likud, and simply wrong. But there still exists a sizable element within the Arab world that has long had, and still maintains but a single goal, and that is the destruction of the State of Israel. At some level, the expansion into the territories, the building of the wall of failure, the overreactions of force by the Israeli polity are all, to some degree, are but responses to the continuous existential threat that will not disappear if the Israelis withdraw to the 1967 borders. And thus, unless there is a substantial change in the Ummah of the Arab world, we would, given a withdrawal to earlier borders, to paraphrase of all people Hillary Clinton, be back here in 10 years having this same conversation. Given the miscalculations by the Israelis, given the miscalculations of the western powers throughout the region over the past century, I don't see the Arab Ummah moving towards any significant change of heart. I see no obvious endgame here. Sorry.

I agree that the Arabs are unlikely to have a change of heart, especially as they see Israel continue to steal their land ( would you accept that? ).

So, unless Israel makes a unilateral change, we will be having the same conversation in 10, 20, 30 years time.

I believe that the reference was to Arabs in general, not just the Palestinians. As such, the land in question is not general Arab property. Considering that two Arab countries took over Palestinian lands in the past, this by itself is not a precedent. There were and there are other territorial disputes among Arab countries, non elicits the same reactions. On the same note, Arabs are generally less riled up by violence committed by Arabs toward the Palestinians.

If I got the gist of Johpa's post - the view is that no matter what Israel will do, the animosity will stay.

[Morch]

The mainstream media press coverage on this latest wave of Palestinian terrorism has been quite biased against Israel. The stories usually lead with words like Israelis shoot Palestinian in the headline and then you have to get into the story to read why ... that they were shooting an actual murderous terrorist that had already seriously injured or killed some random Jewish people. Recent event ... two Palestinian teens 13 and 17 critically injured a 13 year old Jewish boy (the terrorist stabbed him almost a dozen times) and seriously injured a 24 year old Jewish man. One of the terrorists was shot dead and the other is receiving world class medical care at an Israeli hospital. I hope he survives to rot in jail.

Just a sample of the kind of thing that is happening there DAILY.

It's OK to report these events but the leads should really be about the terrorist acts that necessitated a reaction.

Of course the international media are negative towards Israel. Israel is the occupier and invader. They are the bullies.They hold all the peace cards and all the heavy weapons.

Why does the Israeli cabinet approve live ammunition against stone throwers. It is pouring gas on the fire rather than calming things down.

What was the crime warranting the death sentence for 9 Palestinians including a 12 year old, murdered by sadistic IDF, when Gazan demonstrators rolled burning tires towards the border fence behind which the IDF in all their body armor and vehicles were safe. Where were the rubber bullets, water cannons, tear gas, pepper spray.... That way you dont create martyrs; that way you don't escalate the situation...unless you actually want to.

This negative PR could be a foretaste of what might happen if Israel tried something even more sinister.

The tide of public opinion has turned against Israel. More people globally are now aware of the great Israeli hoax: play the victim, when you are in fact the aggressor.

It is not so much a question of international press giving Israel a bad time, as it glosses over Palestinian violence.

Despite the incessant posts to the contrary, the Palestinians are accountable for some of the violence. Despite the incessant posts proclaiming it, use of live ammunition against rock throwers was already approved when the current conflagration started.

The IDF actions in the Gaza border incidents were acknowledged and reviewed by Israel, and a different policy is temporarily in place - so far resulting in less casualties. All those anti-demonstration measures were not deployed, and the forces were not even briefed that such a demonstration would take place. As expected, you choose to interpret it as a secret Israeli plan to escalate the situation, while ignoring simpler and more probable explanations. Considering Israel's reactions after the casualty toll was realized it seems unlikely that this was an intended result.

The tide of public opinion turned against Israel years ago. That is no reason to celebrate biased and misleading reporting.

Who cares how old the legislation is. It's dumb and is counter productive.

I know if I were in a crowd of stone throwing protesters I would rather be hit by a rubber bullet, tear gas or water cannon than a live round. How about you?

That way I don't become a martyr, my bloodied teenage body going viral on the social media creating bad PR for Israel and have all my friends and family at my funeral next day seeking revenge.

My response here is actually to your other post regarding how to lower casualty rates. All this multiple thread quoting is sometimes confusing.

Your claim was that Israel upped the ante by changing the legislation, I point out that this is not quite the case.

Whenever something doesn't fit the narrative, it's the-hell-with-them-pesky-details.

As previously posted, not overly impressed with hypothetical "what I would have done". Maybe because of the actual "been there, done that" element.

I also do not accept rock throwing as a basic human right, but perhaps, as great advocator of passive resistance you see it differently. For me - If you can't face the heat, get out of the kitchen. Don't want to get hurt, don't try hurting others. Especially not when the odds are stacked against you and the consequences are known. Goes back to the reoccurring topic of being responsible for one's actions.

Expecting Palestinian riots to be free of casualties is not realistic, not is it to the advantage of the Palestinians from a PR point of view.

Edited October 15, 2015 by Morch

[Morch]

Sorry thread full..

Morch wrote..

Making things up again, as usual.

The Palestinian did no such thing as you describe. First of all, there is no unified Palestinian leadership to deal with - one is partially willing but unable to deliver, the other (despite claims to the contrary) is not game. Second, Jerusalem was never the capital of any Palestine, according to the 1947 partition plan it was to be administered jointly under international supervision (not a very likely proposition to begin with). Third, the Right or Return being limited to include "a few geriatric Palestinians" is a not an official Palestinian position, and the same goes for replacing the Right of Return with compensation arrangements. Additionally, there is no forthcoming guarantee from anyone to pick the tab, and it does not solve the issue of Palestinians currently living in Arab countries, without citizenship.

The Palestinians and other Arab countries have indeed genuinely proposed peace deals in 2002 and 2007..they still stand, and Hamas have repeatedly offered indefinite truces.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Peace_Initiative

This excuse, we have no-one to negotiate with is baloney. Who on earth was John Kerry talking to for 9 montsh last year?

You misread what I wrote re Jerusalem because of my poor brackets punctuation ..sorry should read.."a small slice of Jerusalem (less than they had before) as their capital".

Quibbling over who would foot the compensation bill is the least problem..it would be chickenfeed for the world community, and a damned good investment for the world economy.For starters would save the EU having to rebuild schools and hospitals for Israel to demolish again.

The link provided, probably inadvertently, is for an Israeli peace initiative....thanks for the chuckle.

Guess that deflection was supposed to be based upon the Arab Peace Initiative? From someone fond of complaining about old chestnuts, this too is rich.

For starters, your claim was that the "Palestinians have laid their cards on the the table" - while the Arab Peace Initiative is commonly attributed to Saudi Arabia. Further more, Hamas rejected the initiative, and continues to do so. The same goes for Iran and Hezbollah, by the way. Hamas notions of truces/ceasefires have been discussed at length over many posts in multiple topics. Seeing as they cannot even abide by the terms of an unofficial minimal ceasefire, it would be hard to imagine them keeping a full blown agreement - even if such was on offer. The usual Hamas formulations include more preconditions than mentioned.

It was also claimed that the Right of Return would be limited to "a few geriatric Palestinians". Can't recall the Arab Peace Initiative actually including this bit, or for that matter, Hamas ever dropping it as a condition.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/862271-death-toll-mounts-in-israel-and-the-palestinian-territories/?p=9965749

With the Palestinians speaking in two voices, Syria fragmented, Iraq in disarray, and Lebanon torn apart by various factions - how can it be said that the offer "still stands"? Time waits for no one, and this opportunity, if it was ever viable, is history. The Middle East of today is not the Middle East of 2002 or 2007.

John Kerry is not a replacement for a Palestinian leadership, and anyway was spending more time talking with the Iranian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mohammad Javad Zarif.

[Morch]

Morch says above (sorry thread full)

There is no one in a position of power in Israel calling for mass deportation of Palestinians, there is no general public support for that sort of thing as well. On top, Israel simply does not have the stomach to carry out something on that scale. Basically, it's just one of your standard propaganda red herring statements.

Here are just a few samples of the people in a position of power in Netanyahu's current cabinet on the issue of a 2 state solution.

Silvan Shalom, interior minister (Likud)

"We are all against a Palestinian state, there is no question about it."

Tzipi Hotovely, deputy foreign minister (Likud)

"This land is ours. All of it is ours"

Naftali Bennett, education minister (Jewish Home)

Aside from repeatedly comparing Palestinians to monkeys, Bennett - the former head of the Yesha Council, which represents Israel's illegal settlements - told the New Yorker in 2013: "I will do everything in my power to make sure they never get a state."

more from other cabinet members... (could only quote 3...fair usage)

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

My question is: if Netanyahu's current cabinet have ruled out a 2 state solution, mathematically we are left with a one state solution. What do they plan to do with the existing 2.5 million Palestinians in the West Bank?..deportation, equal citizenship or apartheid? Simple question.

Morch's other quote..

Curious to know how does Netanyahu's left wing opposition figure into this view of Zionism.

Zionism, yes even ZU's Herzog's variety, is racist. I do not believe that overseas Jews should take precedence in citizenship over the existing non Jewish population.I would like to see Israel become a secular state with perhaps a special proviso that it is always a haven for any persecuted Jewish refugees, and existing family reunions.

.

How do the quotes appearing in the linked article relevant to "mass deportation of Palestinians"? And I do not mean your wild conjectures, but factually, where exactly is it even mentioned. Furthermore, it would take quite a leap of imagination to define most of the politicians quoted as wielding real power when it comes to hypothetical decisions of this magnitude, titles notwithstanding.

The question asked was discussed many times on these topics, including this one. Namely, that the Israeli right wing does not have a clear answer with regard to the implications of their current policies. That you refuse to accept that as a reality, does not change the way things are. Nor does it land credibility to conspiracy theories aired.

Predictably, similar quotes from the Palestinian side receive little acknowledgement (off the top of my head - http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/860733-israel-launches-airstrikes-on-targets-in-gaza/?p=9938708).

As for the second issue:

What you actually posted was "I commonly differentiate between the many righteous Israelis who are genuinely seeking peace and bigoted Zionists who only believe in racial supremacy." (http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/862271-death-toll-mounts-in-israel-and-the-palestinian-territories/?p=9966052).

If Herzog & Co, are deemed racist, who would be those "many righteous Israelis who are genuinely seeking peace"? And, if Herzog & Co. are racist, who is there for the Palestinians to make peace with?

[Morch]

Personally, I would much much rather that Israeli politicians worked out this obvious endgame scenario for themselves and avoid all this unnecessary violence.

As one who is relatively more knowledgeable of the region than most, I am quite impressed if you have come up with an "obvious endgame scenario" to the situation. I wholeheartedly agree that the expansion of settlements into the occupied territories was a major blunder, a huge political miscalculation on the part of the Likud, and simply wrong. But there still exists a sizable element within the Arab world that has long had, and still maintains but a single goal, and that is the destruction of the State of Israel. At some level, the expansion into the territories, the building of the wall of failure, the overreactions of force by the Israeli polity are all, to some degree, are but responses to the continuous existential threat that will not disappear if the Israelis withdraw to the 1967 borders. And thus, unless there is a substantial change in the Ummah of the Arab world, we would, given a withdrawal to earlier borders, to paraphrase of all people Hillary Clinton, be back here in 10 years having this same conversation. Given the miscalculations by the Israelis, given the miscalculations of the western powers throughout the region over the past century, I don't see the Arab Ummah moving towards any significant change of heart. I see no obvious endgame here. Sorry.

I say "obvious endgame" simply because most Israelis apart from some extremist fanatical settlers, do not want to live alongside Palestinians under occupation constantly looking over their shoulders wondering where the next knife attack is coming from.

So if they don't want to live with them, the obvious conclusion is to live without them... in 2 separate states, and to stop having the agenda dictated by the fanatical colonists in the West Bank.

Morch says above that he prefers a 2 state solution, as you have said so too, and he cannot see Israel mass deporting 2.5 million Palestinians in round 3 of ethnic cleansing. I have my doubts and am concerned that that is exactly what Netanyahu's cabinet have in mind in response to the present unrest. They may even have planned it this way.

As time marches on and occupation continues, the settlements increase, and so does the Palestinian population. Something has to give.

Any peace agreement would clearly have to address Israel's security concerns, and will not happen overnight. But this present unrest should be a wakeup call as to what the future will probably look like and that they should get together the sooner the better to discuss the finer details.

And yet, just a post earlier (http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/862271-death-toll-mounts-in-israel-and-the-palestinian-territories/?p=9966590) the implied claim was that most Israelis are bigoted racists.

Here's the thing, people do not always make detached rational choices, and not all situations are easily put into neat little either/or boxes. It is quite possible to be against the occupation, while having serious doubts as to the validity of the proposed alternatives. The prolonged bad blood between Israelis and Palestinians makes trust a major issue, not easily washed away by promises and words. The situation might not be sustainable at some future point, but currently, it is. The costs involved are not overlooked, at least not by all Israelis, but in realistic terms, it is far from clear that risking a change will bring about better results.

Your doubts and conspiracy theories regarding Netanyahu's supposed nefarious plans are not supported by anything concrete. The notion that something of the sort could be carried out on a whim of a few politicians is not very realistic as well. If one actually subscribe to this point of view, what would be the point of making peace with Israel under Netanyahu? (or, as it seems from your other post, under any half viable other candidate).

The present unrest is, so far, not worse than previous instances. Why would a two weeks of riots, which are mostly contained, have a great impact on Israeli perceptions? And why would such a hypothetical impact be conductive to reaching an agreement?

[Johpa]

Zionism, yes even ZU's Herzog's variety, is racist. I do not believe that overseas Jews should take precedence in citizenship over the existing non Jewish population.I would like to see Israel become a secular state with perhaps a special proviso that it is always a haven for any persecuted Jewish refugees, and existing family reunions.

Zionism was never inherently racist although it was a separatist movement. Within the group of modern day Israelis who were born in Israel and thus can not be considered Zionist, there are indeed a lot of racists, such as those who claim they can smell an Arab from a distance. But you can also find many Israelis who speak Arabic and have great sympathy towards their neighbors. Of course the Israeli racism that exists is not nearly as systematic as the racism instilled into the neighboring countries against Jews seen prolifically in the media and even in the school textbooks. Racism, or at least serious prejudice abounds throughout the Middle East. Just look at the Sunni-Shia conflicts. You want to see real racism then find someone bold enough to attempt to publicly daven (Jewish prayer)in the streets of Riyadh or Mecca.

Of course it is a pipe dream that goes against the tides of history that you can have a secular state in the Middle East with a non-Jewish majority that will protect the rights of that Jewish minority. I use to think that all you needed was to get Arafat and Golda Meir into a room, have them smoke a little pot together and sing Kumbaya and they would come out with a peace treaty having seen the light. Perhaps my pessimism is a reflection that I now prefer Sang Som and soda to inhaling cannabis.

[Jingthing]

Zionism by definition is not racist. That's a trick of the obsessive Israel demonization agenda to push that lie. The same flavor of toxicity as equating Israel to apartheid South Africa and Nazis.

If Israel was mostly some other flavor of Muslims instead of Jews you wouldn't be hearing peep one from the same crew who make a career of trying to delegitamize Israel. In my view that specialized obsession with not accepting the right of the Jewish people to have political self determination is what should be labeled as racism against Jews.

Edited October 15, 2015 by Jingthing

[Scott]

Off-topic post removed.

Please address the topic and not the poster.

[Soutpeel]

Zionism by definition is not racist. That's a trick of the obsessive Israel demonization agenda to push that lie. The same flavor of toxicity as equating Israel to apartheid South Africa and Nazis.

If Israel was mostly some other flavor of Muslims instead of Jews you wouldn't be hearing peep one from the same crew who make a career of trying to delegitamize Israel. In my view that specialized obsession with not accepting the right of the Jewish people to have political self determination is what should be labeled as racism against Jews.

Allow me to rephase then

Dennis Goldberg who was South African Jew and actually lived in Israel for a while drew a comparision between apartheid South Africa and Israel and given he was part of the anti apartheid movement this would suggest he is more than amply qualifed to draw those conclusions...

so where is the lie where is the toxicity ?

he is a person who lived in apartheid

South Africa and also experienced Israel first hand and drew these comparisions

Edited October 15, 2015 by Soutpeel

[thaibeachlovers]

Well.....even I, with zero experience in statesmanship, can tell you that the only way this ends will be when one of them goes.

And your suggestion is..................................

one of them has to go.

And your suggestion as to how that will be achieved is............................

[thaibeachlovers]

Zionism, yes even ZU's Herzog's variety, is racist. I do not believe that overseas Jews should take precedence in citizenship over the existing non Jewish population.I would like to see Israel become a secular state with perhaps a special proviso that it is always a haven for any persecuted Jewish refugees, and existing family reunions.

Zionism was never inherently racist although it was a separatist movement. Within the group of modern day Israelis who were born in Israel and thus can not be considered Zionist, there are indeed a lot of racists, such as those who claim they can smell an Arab from a distance. But you can also find many Israelis who speak Arabic and have great sympathy towards their neighbors. Of course the Israeli racism that exists is not nearly as systematic as the racism instilled into the neighboring countries against Jews seen prolifically in the media and even in the school textbooks. Racism, or at least serious prejudice abounds throughout the Middle East. Just look at the Sunni-Shia conflicts. You want to see real racism then find someone bold enough to attempt to publicly daven (Jewish prayer)in the streets of Riyadh or Mecca.

Of course it is a pipe dream that goes against the tides of history that you can have a secular state in the Middle East with a non-Jewish majority that will protect the rights of that Jewish minority. I use to think that all you needed was to get Arafat and Golda Meir into a room, have them smoke a little pot together and sing Kumbaya and they would come out with a peace treaty having seen the light. Perhaps my pessimism is a reflection that I now prefer Sang Som and soda to inhaling cannabis.

You want to see real racism then find someone bold enough to attempt to publicly daven (Jewish prayer)in the streets of Riyadh or Mecca

You are incorrect. That would apply to Christians as well, so not specifically anti Jewish. Anyway it's nothing to do with racism ( and Jews are not a particular race ); it's religious intolerance.

BTW, non Muslims are not permitted in Mecca.

[thaibeachlovers]

Morch says above (sorry thread full)

There is no one in a position of power in Israel calling for mass deportation of Palestinians, there is no general public support for that sort of thing as well. On top, Israel simply does not have the stomach to carry out something on that scale. Basically, it's just one of your standard propaganda red herring statements.

Here are just a few samples of the people in a position of power in Netanyahu's current cabinet on the issue of a 2 state solution.

Silvan Shalom, interior minister (Likud)

"We are all against a Palestinian state, there is no question about it."

Tzipi Hotovely, deputy foreign minister (Likud)

"This land is ours. All of it is ours"

Naftali Bennett, education minister (Jewish Home)

Aside from repeatedly comparing Palestinians to monkeys, Bennett - the former head of the Yesha Council, which represents Israel's illegal settlements - told the New Yorker in 2013: "I will do everything in my power to make sure they never get a state."

more from other cabinet members... (could only quote 3...fair usage)

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

My question is: if Netanyahu's current cabinet have ruled out a 2 state solution, mathematically we are left with a one state solution. What do they plan to do with the existing 2.5 million Palestinians in the West Bank?..deportation, equal citizenship or apartheid? Simple question.

Morch's other quote..

Curious to know how does Netanyahu's left wing opposition figure into this view of Zionism.

Zionism, yes even ZU's Herzog's variety, is racist. I do not believe that overseas Jews should take precedence in citizenship over the existing non Jewish population.I would like to see Israel become a secular state with perhaps a special proviso that it is always a haven for any persecuted Jewish refugees, and existing family reunions.

.

How do the quotes appearing in the linked article relevant to "mass deportation of Palestinians"? And I do not mean your wild conjectures, but factually, where exactly is it even mentioned. Furthermore, it would take quite a leap of imagination to define most of the politicians quoted as wielding real power when it comes to hypothetical decisions of this magnitude, titles notwithstanding.

The question asked was discussed many times on these topics, including this one. Namely, that the Israeli right wing does not have a clear answer with regard to the implications of their current policies. That you refuse to accept that as a reality, does not change the way things are. Nor does it land credibility to conspiracy theories aired.

Predictably, similar quotes from the Palestinian side receive little acknowledgement (off the top of my head - http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/860733-israel-launches-airstrikes-on-targets-in-gaza/?p=9938708).

As for the second issue:

What you actually posted was "I commonly differentiate between the many righteous Israelis who are genuinely seeking peace and bigoted Zionists who only believe in racial supremacy." (http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/862271-death-toll-mounts-in-israel-and-the-palestinian-territories/?p=9966052).

If Herzog & Co, are deemed racist, who would be those "many righteous Israelis who are genuinely seeking peace"? And, if Herzog & Co. are racist, who is there for the Palestinians to make peace with?

that the Israeli right wing does not have a clear answer with regard to the implications of their current policies.

If they do not know what the outcome of their policies will be then they are ignorant. They only have to look at what became of apartheid Sth Africa to know what will happen eventually. While the US currently uses it's veto to prevent anti Israeli votes in the UN becoming policy, that will change, sooner or later, and when that happens it really will be the end game for Israel, and very much self inflicted.

Currently, the situation is like a tsunami when the sea has retreated. It looks quiet, but when the water comes back it washes everything away in its path. Same will happen to Israel when they go too far ( as they will ) and ignite a rage against them throughout the world.

Edited October 15, 2015 by thaibeachlovers

[Jingthing]

( and Jews are not a particular race )

Jews are a ethno-religious ethnic group. Not only a religion.

Edited October 15, 2015 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

that the Israeli right wing does not have a clear answer with regard to the implications of their current policies.

If they do not know what the outcome of their policies will be then they are ignorant. They only have to look at what became of apartheid Sth Africa to know what will happen eventually. While the US currently uses it's veto to prevent anti Israeli votes in the UN becoming policy, that will change, sooner or later, and when that happens it really will be the end game for Israel, and very much self inflicted.

Currently, the situation is like a tsunami when the sea has retreated. It looks quiet, but when the water comes back it washes everything away in its path. Same will happen to Israel when they go too far ( as they will ) and ignite a rage against them throughout the world.

Israel is a specific case. It is not South Africa. It is not Nazi Germany.

[thaibeachlovers]

that the Israeli right wing does not have a clear answer with regard to the implications of their current policies.

If they do not know what the outcome of their policies will be then they are ignorant. They only have to look at what became of apartheid Sth Africa to know what will happen eventually. While the US currently uses it's veto to prevent anti Israeli votes in the UN becoming policy, that will change, sooner or later, and when that happens it really will be the end game for Israel, and very much self inflicted.

Currently, the situation is like a tsunami when the sea has retreated. It looks quiet, but when the water comes back it washes everything away in its path. Same will happen to Israel when they go too far ( as they will ) and ignite a rage against them throughout the world.

Israel is a specific case. It is not South Africa. It is not Nazi Germany.

Yes, it is a specific case and it will be specifically targeted when it goes too far ( as it will ).

[Jingthing]

that the Israeli right wing does not have a clear answer with regard to the implications of their current policies.

If they do not know what the outcome of their policies will be then they are ignorant. They only have to look at what became of apartheid Sth Africa to know what will happen eventually. While the US currently uses it's veto to prevent anti Israeli votes in the UN becoming policy, that will change, sooner or later, and when that happens it really will be the end game for Israel, and very much self inflicted.

Currently, the situation is like a tsunami when the sea has retreated. It looks quiet, but when the water comes back it washes everything away in its path. Same will happen to Israel when they go too far ( as they will ) and ignite a rage against them throughout the world.

Israel is a specific case. It is not South Africa. It is not Nazi Germany.

Yes, it is a specific case and it will be specifically targeted when it goes too far ( as it will ).

Thank so much for sharing your unbiased predictions.

[Morch]

Zionism by definition is not racist. That's a trick of the obsessive Israel demonization agenda to push that lie. The same flavor of toxicity as equating Israel to apartheid South Africa and Nazis.

If Israel was mostly some other flavor of Muslims instead of Jews you wouldn't be hearing peep one from the same crew who make a career of trying to delegitamize Israel. In my view that specialized obsession with not accepting the right of the Jewish people to have political self determination is what should be labeled as racism against Jews.

Allow me to rephase then

Dennis Goldberg who was South African Jew and actually lived in Israel for a while drew a comparision between apartheid South Africa and Israel and given he was part of the anti apartheid movement this would suggest he is more than amply qualifed to draw those conclusions...

so where is the lie where is the toxicity ?

he is a person who lived in apartheid

South Africa and also experienced Israel first hand and drew these comparisions

Not sure how this is on topic, and my addition would probably make it even more so.

As far as I recall, Dennis Goldberg did not really consider his Jewish heritage as a core element in his life. That when he got the chance to use that get-out-jail card courtesy of the Israeli government must have been painful. As for "actually lived in Israel for a while" - that would be stretching things a bit, Goldberg was deported to Israel following his release, and resided for a few weeks with his daughter, who at the time lived in Israel. Hilary, while definitely a pro-peace, and pro-Palestinian activist, did not share her father's view on the Israeli situation being similar to South Africa's apartheid. One could easily quote better informed members of the anti-apartheid movement who resided in Israel for years, but then their views would not all be as negative as Goldberg's.

Better luck next time.

[Morch]

How do the quotes appearing in the linked article relevant to "mass deportation of Palestinians"? And I do not mean your wild conjectures, but factually, where exactly is it even mentioned. Furthermore, it would take quite a leap of imagination to define most of the politicians quoted as wielding real power when it comes to hypothetical decisions of this magnitude, titles notwithstanding.

The question asked was discussed many times on these topics, including this one. Namely, that the Israeli right wing does not have a clear answer with regard to the implications of their current policies. That you refuse to accept that as a reality, does not change the way things are. Nor does it land credibility to conspiracy theories aired.

Predictably, similar quotes from the Palestinian side receive little acknowledgement (off the top of my head - http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/860733-israel-launches-airstrikes-on-targets-in-gaza/?p=9938708).

As for the second issue:

What you actually posted was "I commonly differentiate between the many righteous Israelis who are genuinely seeking peace and bigoted Zionists who only believe in racial supremacy." (http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/862271-death-toll-mounts-in-israel-and-the-palestinian-territories/?p=9966052).

If Herzog & Co, are deemed racist, who would be those "many righteous Israelis who are genuinely seeking peace"? And, if Herzog & Co. are racist, who is there for the Palestinians to make peace with?

that the Israeli right wing does not have a clear answer with regard to the implications of their current policies.

If they do not know what the outcome of their policies will be then they are ignorant. They only have to look at what became of apartheid Sth Africa to know what will happen eventually. While the US currently uses it's veto to prevent anti Israeli votes in the UN becoming policy, that will change, sooner or later, and when that happens it really will be the end game for Israel, and very much self inflicted.

Currently, the situation is like a tsunami when the sea has retreated. It looks quiet, but when the water comes back it washes everything away in its path. Same will happen to Israel when they go too far ( as they will ) and ignite a rage against them throughout the world.

Not so much that they do not know, but rather that they are unwilling to face the probable outcomes of their ideology. Wouldn't be the first politicians to plow ahead with non-viable policies. Denial is a quite common mental phenomenon among humans. Also, as with many politicians in democratic systems, the average horizon is next elections - distant future outcomes come less into play.

Things may or may not pan out the way described. One thing to consider is that while acknowledging possible changes in USA position vs. Israel, one should bear in mind that similar shifts in global perceptions and agenda are all over the place. For example, the current unrest would have made much more headlines if the World's attention was not caught up with other matters. One can also envisage the Palestinian cause losing international and regional support, even if that seems less likely at this time.

I think that many Israelis, even not right wing voters, feel that a stable peace with the Palestinians is not (at least currently) a viable proposition. Even if one thinks that they are rationally wrong, it is hard to argue with a sentiment. Outsiders urging Israelis to take the plunge (especially with the "for their own good" element), is often seen as disconnected from current reality (and to an extent, it is). Convincing people living a reality, that outsiders not experiencing the same know better is a tricky thing. The constant barrage of unbalanced criticism, vile rhetoric and outright hatred does not play a helpful role in this.

[up-country_sinclair]

that the Israeli right wing does not have a clear answer with regard to the implications of their current policies.

If they do not know what the outcome of their policies will be then they are ignorant. They only have to look at what became of apartheid Sth Africa to know what will happen eventually. While the US currently uses it's veto to prevent anti Israeli votes in the UN becoming policy, that will change, sooner or later, and when that happens it really will be the end game for Israel, and very much self inflicted.

Currently, the situation is like a tsunami when the sea has retreated. It looks quiet, but when the water comes back it washes everything away in its path. Same will happen to Israel when they go too far ( as they will ) and ignite a rage against them throughout the world.

Israel is a specific case. It is not South Africa. It is not Nazi Germany.

This is true. They are not identical.

The occupiers have implemented their own unique brand of apartheid and despicable persecution.

By the way, Judaism is a religion. Not a race. Not a "people". It's just a religion, and it's as absurd as the next.

[Keira1]

Sure, Judaism is full of superstitions etc, as any other religions, including Hinduism, Christianity and Buddhism. But it is how it is practiced, in real life, that really matters. I have live many years in a muslim country, and that's not something I would like to do again. Just a small example: I, as female, dressed in long sleeves and long pants, was riding a scooter in an african, muslim little town, and people were shouting at me "wh.re!, b.tch!", simply because they don't like to see a female sit on scooter and drive around. These are very backward people.

Edited October 16, 2015 by Keira1

[Morch]

Sure, Judaism is full of superstitions etc, as any other religions, including Hinduism, Christianity and Buddhism. But it is how it is practiced, in real life, that really matters. I have live many years in a muslim country, and that's not something I would like to do again. Just a small example: I, as female, dressed in long sleeves and long pants, was riding a scooter in an african, muslim little town, and people were shouting at me "wh.re!, b.tch!", simply because they don't like to see a female sit on scooter and drive around. These are very backward people.

The exact same will probably happen if you tried that in some of Israel's ultra-orthodox Jewish neighborhoods.