Biden: 'Overwhelming frustration' with Israeli govt

[Morch]

Sorry thread full..

Morch wrote..

There isn't a single agreed upon definition of Zionism. Not even if you produce a link to such. There will always be someone with a different take. Columns in Haaretz, even by noted authors, are not conclusive or definitive.

Basically, what you recognize is immaterial. Israel exists as it is, warts and all. You may wish that it would change to something resembling an ideal Western country, but there is little chance of that happening anytime soon - external pressure or not. The double standards applied are obvious - no similar expectations from any of Israel's neighbor, including the future Palestinian State. As there is no secular state of Israel (in that there's no full separation of religion and state), your position amounts to rejecting the existence of Israel.

The fantasy one-state touted is not achievable, at least not in anything but the far future. There isn't a good precedent for such peaceful coexistence in the Modern Middle East. Quite the opposite. There is no wide support for this notion among Israelis and Palestinians, more of a Leftist Western concept forced on a Middle East situation. In essence, this too will not be a State of Israel, so once again, what you're supporting is the destruction of Israel.

As usual a lot of words, but little substance...more of well this is the way things are until they change; lets just muddle through without realizing where we are going. This is the same attitude that Joe Biden is frustrated with.

In that Israel controls the lives of everyone in historic Palestine, it would appear my fantasy one state already exists. Joe Biden is asking Israel: so what do you plan to do with all the people under your control?

"He said those policies were moving Israel toward a "one-state reality" — meaning a single state for Palestinians and Israelis in which, eventually, Israeli Jews will no longer be the majority.

"That reality is dangerous," Biden added."

I have given my definition of Zionism and I dont think it is too far removed from its first proponents Nathan Birnbaum and Theodor Herzl. On those grounds I do indeed reject the existence of the current Zionist regime in Israel. I think it is racist/religionist, colonialist, supremacist and evil....as are all those who support a Jewish State and the Jewish Right of Return to a place they have never seen before, while denying those same rights to Palestinians who were born there. I notice you dont give your own definition. Is that all in the too hard basket as well?

I will stick with my clearly defined understanding of the word, and perhaps Israeli apologists can respect that without thinking it is a code word for something else.

The reason Israel cops so much flak is that it is savable. It purports to be a modern democratic country. I want it to ditch the hypocrisy and be one. We can then work on its neighbors, who may take note of the civilized country next door. At the moment they quite rightly can use Israel to point out US double standards when it comes to freedom and human rights.

I guess what you mean by "substance" is picking up your brand of rhetoric? Or the apparent dichotomous take on reality? Perhaps the obsession with filing and tagging everything into neat ideological boxes?

Not much into all of the above.

The demographics on the region are quite obvious, as are future trends. I have posted on these issues, including some analysis of how these are perceived by various parties. It was repeatedly pointed out that the considerations of both sides are not always lodged on the same logic one might expect. The main examples being Israeli right wing politics not addressing it in a realistic manner, and the Palestinians generally exhibiting negative sentiments with regard to one-state solutions (in the sense touted on your posts).

That's reality, and if you don't like it - tough luck. Inventing one doesn't cut it.

Your one state solution is indeed a fantasy. There is no widespread willingness, on either side, to accept it. What you tout is not on even on offer. A one state solution, under current conditions, will go to the dogs in no time. There is no Middle Eastern precedent indicating that such a proposition is a viable one. Majorities tend to assert themselves, communal strife is a given. Fantasies will not change that, and inflammatory rhetoric does not help make things any easier.

Applying liberal Western concepts with disregard to obvious differences is folly.

Not overly interested in ideological categorizing. Most often serves to marginalize or crudely categorize people. Hence, I find your rigid definition of Zionism almost meaningless other than as an extension of your usual inflammatory rhetoric. If this lacks in "substance" go back to the end of the OP, where Biden comments favorably on Stav Shaffir - a Zionist, just not one quite fitting your definition. Seems like my first post on this topic applies.

It might come as a shock, but most people do not live exactly within the confines of cherry-picked rigid ideological definitions plucked from the internet.

Israel gets a lot of flak, and rightly so. That does not mean all of it is justified or reasonable. But from where you stand, there are no degrees - Israel is the root of all that's evil, and anyone not 100% against it is a villain. Doesn't leave much room for discussion, and doesn't sound awfully liberal and open-minded. Taking a black and white position on complex situations is more appropriate for children, or zealots. Biden's speech incorporated criticism of the Palestinians as well. More of this was pronounced on other occasions. Notably, there is no reference to this in any of you posts.

[dexterm]

Sorry thread full..

Morch wrote..

There isn't a single agreed upon definition of Zionism. Not even if you produce a link to such. There will always be someone with a different take. Columns in Haaretz, even by noted authors, are not conclusive or definitive.

Basically, what you recognize is immaterial. Israel exists as it is, warts and all. You may wish that it would change to something resembling an ideal Western country, but there is little chance of that happening anytime soon - external pressure or not. The double standards applied are obvious - no similar expectations from any of Israel's neighbor, including the future Palestinian State. As there is no secular state of Israel (in that there's no full separation of religion and state), your position amounts to rejecting the existence of Israel.

The fantasy one-state touted is not achievable, at least not in anything but the far future. There isn't a good precedent for such peaceful coexistence in the Modern Middle East. Quite the opposite. There is no wide support for this notion among Israelis and Palestinians, more of a Leftist Western concept forced on a Middle East situation. In essence, this too will not be a State of Israel, so once again, what you're supporting is the destruction of Israel.

As usual a lot of words, but little substance...more of well this is the way things are until they change; lets just muddle through without realizing where we are going. This is the same attitude that Joe Biden is frustrated with.

In that Israel controls the lives of everyone in historic Palestine, it would appear my fantasy one state already exists. Joe Biden is asking Israel: so what do you plan to do with all the people under your control?

"He said those policies were moving Israel toward a "one-state reality" — meaning a single state for Palestinians and Israelis in which, eventually, Israeli Jews will no longer be the majority.

"That reality is dangerous," Biden added."

I have given my definition of Zionism and I dont think it is too far removed from its first proponents Nathan Birnbaum and Theodor Herzl. On those grounds I do indeed reject the existence of the current Zionist regime in Israel. I think it is racist/religionist, colonialist, supremacist and evil....as are all those who support a Jewish State and the Jewish Right of Return to a place they have never seen before, while denying those same rights to Palestinians who were born there. I notice you dont give your own definition. Is that all in the too hard basket as well?

I will stick with my clearly defined understanding of the word, and perhaps Israeli apologists can respect that without thinking it is a code word for something else.

The reason Israel cops so much flak is that it is savable. It purports to be a modern democratic country. I want it to ditch the hypocrisy and be one. We can then work on its neighbors, who may take note of the civilized country next door. At the moment they quite rightly can use Israel to point out US double standards when it comes to freedom and human rights.

I guess what you mean by "substance" is picking up your brand of rhetoric? Or the apparent dichotomous take on reality? Perhaps the obsession with filing and tagging everything into neat ideological boxes?

Not much into all of the above.

The demographics on the region are quite obvious, as are future trends. I have posted on these issues, including some analysis of how these are perceived by various parties. It was repeatedly pointed out that the considerations of both sides are not always lodged on the same logic one might expect. The main examples being Israeli right wing politics not addressing it in a realistic manner, and the Palestinians generally exhibiting negative sentiments with regard to one-state solutions (in the sense touted on your posts).

That's reality, and if you don't like it - tough luck. Inventing one doesn't cut it.

Your one state solution is indeed a fantasy. There is no widespread willingness, on either side, to accept it. What you tout is not on even on offer. A one state solution, under current conditions, will go to the dogs in no time. There is no Middle Eastern precedent indicating that such a proposition is a viable one. Majorities tend to assert themselves, communal strife is a given. Fantasies will not change that, and inflammatory rhetoric does not help make things any easier.

Applying liberal Western concepts with disregard to obvious differences is folly.

Not overly interested in ideological categorizing. Most often serves to marginalize or crudely categorize people. Hence, I find your rigid definition of Zionism almost meaningless other than as an extension of your usual inflammatory rhetoric. If this lacks in "substance" go back to the end of the OP, where Biden comments favorably on Stav Shaffir - a Zionist, just not one quite fitting your definition. Seems like my first post on this topic applies.

It might come as a shock, but most people do not live exactly within the confines of cherry-picked rigid ideological definitions plucked from the internet.

Israel gets a lot of flak, and rightly so. That does not mean all of it is justified or reasonable. But from where you stand, there are no degrees - Israel is the root of all that's evil, and anyone not 100% against it is a villain. Doesn't leave much room for discussion, and doesn't sound awfully liberal and open-minded. Taking a black and white position on complex situations is more appropriate for children, or zealots. Biden's speech incorporated criticism of the Palestinians as well. More of this was pronounced on other occasions. Notably, there is no reference to this in any of you posts.

Far from being meaningless Zionism as I defined it is the root cause of the entire conflict. Everything else stems from it.

1. The desire to have a Jewish State means Jews have to be the majority. Simple math. From that flows the early colonization and exclusion of Palestinians, all the ethnic cleansing from partition Palestine, and now the expansion of Jewish only colonies in the West Bank displacing Palestinians yet again, and all the turmoil that entails, and all the criticism Israel takes for the disproportionate way it handles it.

2. The right of Jews to migrate and take up instant citizenship, while Palestinians cannot even marry non Jews from outside Israel of course is an attempt to shore up the Jewish majority and is discriminatory under the guise of "security". Return to point 1.

What many Israeli apologists find difficult to come to terms with and try to sweep under the carpet is this dichotomy: you cannot be a democracy and a Jewish State. Something has to give. It will be the latter eventually, inevitably.

You and Biden mentioned the young politician Stav Shaffir who has done some good works. You call her a Zionist, but according to you that is indefinable.

[JingerBen]

Biden's criticism of Netanyahu's government and Bernie Sanders' obvious dislike for radical Zionism are very positive developments for the prospect of peace in the Middle East.

You have to pay obeisance to Israel if you want to become the US President. You have to swear your full compliance with Israel's demands. You have to run to AIPAC and declare your eternal love of the Jewish state. This is a truism.

Or so it was until Sanders turned the tables and changed the rules. We do not know yet whether the game will succeed and he will be anointed the next President . We do not know even whether he will snatch the Democrats' nomination from the teeth of Mrs. Clinton. But he already achieved a great victory and toppled the mainstay pillar of the regime.

It is fitting that a Jew would undo the Jewish hegemony in the US, as it was a Communist Gorbachev who undid the Communist rule in the USSR. Some systems are too strong and impervious for an outside force; it is the inner impulse that breaks the hatching egg.

[Steely Dan]

It would appear that Biden's frustration is as nothing compared to that of some of our esteemed members. It's all so unnecessary too, whilst the Palestinians attempt to get their own way without even negotiating with Israel the Israelis are changing the facts on the ground. I refer not to settlement activity but to Arab-Israeli relations. This is going to curtail the flow of money and arms to terrorists and is a game changer. Little wonder western leftists appear to be losing their minds.

[Jingthing]

It would appear that Biden's frustration is as nothing compared to that of some of our esteemed members. It's all so unnecessary too, whilst the Palestinians attempt to get their own way without even negotiating with Israel the Israelis are changing the facts on the ground. I refer not to settlement activity but to Arab-Israeli relations. This is going to curtail the flow of money and arms to terrorists and is a game changer. Little wonder western leftists appear to be losing their minds.

Yes, but I think there is SOME truth to the leftist perspective that Israel will become less democratic if a two state solution can't somehow be engineered. (And yes that would require the political will on BOTH sides which currently does not exist on EITHER side.)

What isn't true is that Israel will ever accept a one state solution where they allow Jews to be a minority or EVER given up BASIC and CORE "Zionist" (in a GOOD way) values of universal right of return for Jews. The Israel demonization agenda is so obvious -- the end of Israel as a Jewish majority nation state, one way or another.

Sorry haters on Israel -- Israelis may be a lot of things, but they are not STUPID or particularly SUICIDAL.

Is it desirable for Israel to be less democratic and more right wing? No, of course not.

But that is more desirable than Israel NOT existing and an Israel without a Jewish majority means Israel no longer exists.

Edited April 21, 2016 by Jingthing

[DeaconJohn]

It would appear that Biden's frustration is as nothing compared to that of some of our esteemed members. It's all so unnecessary too, whilst the Palestinians attempt to get their own way without even negotiating with Israel the Israelis are changing the facts on the ground. I refer not to settlement activity but to Arab-Israeli relations. This is going to curtail the flow of money and arms to terrorists and is a game changer. Little wonder western leftists appear to be losing their minds.

Yes, but I think there is SOME truth to the leftist perspective that Israel will become less democratic if a two state solution can't somehow be engineered. (And yes that would require the political will on BOTH sides which currently does not exist on EITHER side.)

What isn't true is that Israel will ever accept a one state solution where they allow Jews to be a minority or EVER given up BASIC and CORE "Zionist" (in a GOOD way) values of universal right of return for Jews. The Israel demonization agenda is so obvious -- the end of Israel as a Jewish majority nation state, one way or another.

Sorry haters on Israel -- Israelis may be a lot of things, but they are not STUPID or particularly SUICIDAL.

Is it desirable for Israel to be less democratic and more right wing? No, of course not.

But that is more desirable than Israel NOT existing and an Israel without a Jewish majority means Israel no longer exists.

The only way that Israel can have a Jewish majority is if they live within their internationally recognized 1967 borders.

More and more Israelis are beginning to see that the Likudniks are more of a threat than their worst enemies ever were.

[Steely Dan]

It would appear that Biden's frustration is as nothing compared to that of some of our esteemed members. It's all so unnecessary too, whilst the Palestinians attempt to get their own way without even negotiating with Israel the Israelis are changing the facts on the ground. I refer not to settlement activity but to Arab-Israeli relations. This is going to curtail the flow of money and arms to terrorists and is a game changer. Little wonder western leftists appear to be losing their minds.

Yes, but I think there is SOME truth to the leftist perspective that Israel will become less democratic if a two state solution can't somehow be engineered. (And yes that would require the political will on BOTH sides which currently does not exist on EITHER side.)

What isn't true is that Israel will ever accept a one state solution where they allow Jews to be a minority or EVER given up BASIC and CORE "Zionist" (in a GOOD way) values of universal right of return for Jews. The Israel demonization agenda is so obvious -- the end of Israel as a Jewish majority nation state, one way or another.

Sorry haters on Israel -- Israelis may be a lot of things, but they are not STUPID or particularly SUICIDAL.

Is it desirable for Israel to be less democratic and more right wing? No, of course not.

But that is more desirable than Israel NOT existing and an Israel without a Jewish majority means Israel no longer exists.

The only way that Israel can have a Jewish majority is if they live within their internationally recognized 1967 borders.

More and more Israelis are beginning to see that the Likudniks are more of a threat than their worst enemies ever were.

More and more Israelis are coming to recognize there are no immediate prospects of a two state solution and physical separation is the only viable interim option. This comes from the opposition leader Herzog, who claims 65% of Israelis favour this approach.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/29/opinion/international/only-separation-can-lead-to-a-two-state-solution.html?_r=0

I would estimate it would take two generations of separation before the barriers could come down, If the incitement stopped today.

[Jingthing]

Those sound like and realistic solid ideas.

So unlike the "plans" from the Israel demonization agenda which is more like the kill Israel agenda.

Edited April 21, 2016 by Jingthing

[Gary A]

I'm not a Jew but if I were, I'd certainly want a strong leader. That leader would likely be a Zionist. No one can eliminate thousands of years of hatred. I do think that Israel would love to have peace The Palestinians just want Israel removed from the face of the earth. There is no room for negotiation there.

[Jingthing]

Of course any Israeli leader will support the existence and defense of Israel and to preserve the Jewish right of return ... thus a Zionist. It's more about the particular flavor of Zionist.

[dexterm]

It would appear that Biden's frustration is as nothing compared to that of some of our esteemed members. It's all so unnecessary too, whilst the Palestinians attempt to get their own way without even negotiating with Israel the Israelis are changing the facts on the ground. I refer not to settlement activity but to Arab-Israeli relations. This is going to curtail the flow of money and arms to terrorists and is a game changer. Little wonder western leftists appear to be losing their minds.

Yes, but I think there is SOME truth to the leftist perspective that Israel will become less democratic if a two state solution can't somehow be engineered. (And yes that would require the political will on BOTH sides which currently does not exist on EITHER side.)

What isn't true is that Israel will ever accept a one state solution where they allow Jews to be a minority or EVER given up BASIC and CORE "Zionist" (in a GOOD way) values of universal right of return for Jews. The Israel demonization agenda is so obvious -- the end of Israel as a Jewish majority nation state, one way or another.

Sorry haters on Israel -- Israelis may be a lot of things, but they are not STUPID or particularly SUICIDAL.

Is it desirable for Israel to be less democratic and more right wing? No, of course not.

But that is more desirable than Israel NOT existing and an Israel without a Jewish majority means Israel no longer exists.

>>The Israel demonization agenda is so obvious -- the end of Israel as a Jewish majority nation state, one way or another.

Absolutely. Got it in one [..year's worth of posting!] A return to a Palestine of mixed religions exactly as it was 100 years ago, before European Zionist colonialists invaded to take over and dominate the land.

And that is exactly what will happen sooner or later.

Israel can do it the easy way or the messy way, as Joe Biden hinted at in the OP.

The easy way. Make peace with the Palestinians in a just 2 state solution. If the deal offered isn't just and fair the Palestinians will say no and the world will support them. The conflict festers on while the demographic problem grows.

The messy way. Continued land grabs by the right wing Zionist fanatics, continued repression of Palestinian human rights, continued resistance from freedom fighters. Increased global awareness through the international and social media of the great Zionist hoax: Israel plays the role of victim when they are in fact the aggressor. The conflict festers on while the demographic problem grows. Eventual capitulation from Israel due to internal and external pressure that forces a just 2 state solution. But that offer may no longer be on the table.

Either way, after decades of peace the two peoples will gradually and inevitably assimilate into one country. Especially if they both end up joining any free movement organisations such as the EU.

What isn't true is that Israel will ever accept a one state solution where they allow Jews to be a minority or EVER given up BASIC and CORE "Zionist" (in a GOOD way) values of universal right of return for Jews.

There you have it folks. Replace a few of the words and you have the manifesto of many racist/religionist regimes that have existed historically. Israel must maintain racial/religionist supremacy at all costs.

In fact I know of no other country in the world which automatically grants citizenship and a second passport solely for religious reasons.

Edited April 21, 2016 by dexterm

[Morch]

Sorry thread full..

Morch wrote..

There isn't a single agreed upon definition of Zionism. Not even if you produce a link to such. There will always be someone with a different take. Columns in Haaretz, even by noted authors, are not conclusive or definitive.

Basically, what you recognize is immaterial. Israel exists as it is, warts and all. You may wish that it would change to something resembling an ideal Western country, but there is little chance of that happening anytime soon - external pressure or not. The double standards applied are obvious - no similar expectations from any of Israel's neighbor, including the future Palestinian State. As there is no secular state of Israel (in that there's no full separation of religion and state), your position amounts to rejecting the existence of Israel.

The fantasy one-state touted is not achievable, at least not in anything but the far future. There isn't a good precedent for such peaceful coexistence in the Modern Middle East. Quite the opposite. There is no wide support for this notion among Israelis and Palestinians, more of a Leftist Western concept forced on a Middle East situation. In essence, this too will not be a State of Israel, so once again, what you're supporting is the destruction of Israel.

As usual a lot of words, but little substance...more of well this is the way things are until they change; lets just muddle through without realizing where we are going. This is the same attitude that Joe Biden is frustrated with.

In that Israel controls the lives of everyone in historic Palestine, it would appear my fantasy one state already exists. Joe Biden is asking Israel: so what do you plan to do with all the people under your control?

"He said those policies were moving Israel toward a "one-state reality" — meaning a single state for Palestinians and Israelis in which, eventually, Israeli Jews will no longer be the majority.

"That reality is dangerous," Biden added."

I have given my definition of Zionism and I dont think it is too far removed from its first proponents Nathan Birnbaum and Theodor Herzl. On those grounds I do indeed reject the existence of the current Zionist regime in Israel. I think it is racist/religionist, colonialist, supremacist and evil....as are all those who support a Jewish State and the Jewish Right of Return to a place they have never seen before, while denying those same rights to Palestinians who were born there. I notice you dont give your own definition. Is that all in the too hard basket as well?

I will stick with my clearly defined understanding of the word, and perhaps Israeli apologists can respect that without thinking it is a code word for something else.

The reason Israel cops so much flak is that it is savable. It purports to be a modern democratic country. I want it to ditch the hypocrisy and be one. We can then work on its neighbors, who may take note of the civilized country next door. At the moment they quite rightly can use Israel to point out US double standards when it comes to freedom and human rights.

I guess what you mean by "substance" is picking up your brand of rhetoric? Or the apparent dichotomous take on reality? Perhaps the obsession with filing and tagging everything into neat ideological boxes?

Not much into all of the above.

The demographics on the region are quite obvious, as are future trends. I have posted on these issues, including some analysis of how these are perceived by various parties. It was repeatedly pointed out that the considerations of both sides are not always lodged on the same logic one might expect. The main examples being Israeli right wing politics not addressing it in a realistic manner, and the Palestinians generally exhibiting negative sentiments with regard to one-state solutions (in the sense touted on your posts).

That's reality, and if you don't like it - tough luck. Inventing one doesn't cut it.

Your one state solution is indeed a fantasy. There is no widespread willingness, on either side, to accept it. What you tout is not on even on offer. A one state solution, under current conditions, will go to the dogs in no time. There is no Middle Eastern precedent indicating that such a proposition is a viable one. Majorities tend to assert themselves, communal strife is a given. Fantasies will not change that, and inflammatory rhetoric does not help make things any easier.

Applying liberal Western concepts with disregard to obvious differences is folly.

Not overly interested in ideological categorizing. Most often serves to marginalize or crudely categorize people. Hence, I find your rigid definition of Zionism almost meaningless other than as an extension of your usual inflammatory rhetoric. If this lacks in "substance" go back to the end of the OP, where Biden comments favorably on Stav Shaffir - a Zionist, just not one quite fitting your definition. Seems like my first post on this topic applies.

It might come as a shock, but most people do not live exactly within the confines of cherry-picked rigid ideological definitions plucked from the internet.

Israel gets a lot of flak, and rightly so. That does not mean all of it is justified or reasonable. But from where you stand, there are no degrees - Israel is the root of all that's evil, and anyone not 100% against it is a villain. Doesn't leave much room for discussion, and doesn't sound awfully liberal and open-minded. Taking a black and white position on complex situations is more appropriate for children, or zealots. Biden's speech incorporated criticism of the Palestinians as well. More of this was pronounced on other occasions. Notably, there is no reference to this in any of you posts.

Far from being meaningless Zionism as I defined it is the root cause of the entire conflict. Everything else stems from it.

1. The desire to have a Jewish State means Jews have to be the majority. Simple math. From that flows the early colonization and exclusion of Palestinians, all the ethnic cleansing from partition Palestine, and now the expansion of Jewish only colonies in the West Bank displacing Palestinians yet again, and all the turmoil that entails, and all the criticism Israel takes for the disproportionate way it handles it.

2. The right of Jews to migrate and take up instant citizenship, while Palestinians cannot even marry non Jews from outside Israel of course is an attempt to shore up the Jewish majority and is discriminatory under the guise of "security". Return to point 1.

What many Israeli apologists find difficult to come to terms with and try to sweep under the carpet is this dichotomy: you cannot be a democracy and a Jewish State. Something has to give. It will be the latter eventually, inevitably.

You and Biden mentioned the young politician Stav Shaffir who has done some good works. You call her a Zionist, but according to you that is indefinable.

It is a meaningless definition in the sense that it does not allow room for the existence of other versions of Zionism (can call them "alternative", or "soft", if it helps). As long as a definition is used to simply brand everyone into one fictitious group, it is useless (apart from the hate mongering effect). Pretty much as defining all Palestinians as Muslim terrorists or whatnot.

There were various ideas, schools and trends in the evolution of the Zionist movement. To say that it is exactly what it was when it started is off mark. But again, serves the demonize and exclude any opinions which do not conform to your radical thinking.

As posted many times in the past, I do not see democracy as an absolute concept, but rather as a matter of degree. Israel is obviously not as democratic as some countries (especially Western democracies), but far from being a totalitarian regime as well. That there is a contrast between "democratic" and "Jewish" (or Islamic) in defining a state is a given - but it does not automatically send a country to the bottom of the list. Israel might not be the paragon of democracy, but then it does not exist under the same condition enjoyed by most Western democracies. Once again, a question of seeing the world in black and white....

Stav Shaffier calls herself a Zionist. That's the whole point. It is not that Zionism is undefinable, but rather that people can have different concepts of what it means. I couldn't care less how she defines herself, ideological tags aren't what they used to be.

And of course, not a word on Biden's criticism of the Palestinians.....

[Steely Dan]

Dextern wrote

Either way, after decades of peace the two peoples will gradually and inevitably assimilate into one country. Especially if they both end up joining any free movement organisations such as the EU.

Behold the ideological chasm that exists in the world today, aside from the usual Jew hating which is but a small subset of the overall picture. I am referring to the battle between the internationalist left and the defenders of the nation state. The EU is an example of the internationalists running riot. Israel (for whatever reason) has been selected to be a talisman of the leftist utopia. All they need to do is renounce their culture, forget about identity, individualism and self-determination to be subsumed into the great homogeneous collective. Islamic culture is of course the great consumer of other cultures, a fact not lost on the left. It is no coincidence that Europe has taken in tens of millions of Muslims at an ever increasing rate. Behold the left-Islamist alliance, would be destroyers of the nation state.

Israel is of course the canary in the West's coal mine. Security measures are becoming more and more necessary. Walls and barriers are springing up to keep out the other. Just as Likud rules Israel Europe swings to the right for the same reasons.

Biden of course represents the Obama administration and the internationalist left. The assassins of the nation state. Removing borders, diluting homogenous ethnic or cultural groups, using Islam as a means of attack. Israel is of course a thorn in the side here. So is every middle eastern monarchy. Muslim brotherhood good, Arab Spring useful, Mexican border fence problematic, the constitution inconvenient.

If the internationalist left are so intent on carrying out their experiment of creating a borderless world then kindly try it on yourselves. The EU can grant Turkey accession and the US can remove the Mexican border fence and plant a dozen medium range tactical Dearborns in its cities.

Little wonder that Geert Wilders and Viktor Orban amongst others have opined that if Israel falls so too does the west.

[Morch]

Biden's criticism of Netanyahu's government and Bernie Sanders' obvious dislike for radical Zionism are very positive developments for the prospect of peace in the Middle East.

You have to pay obeisance to Israel if you want to become the US President. You have to swear your full compliance with Israel's demands. You have to run to AIPAC and declare your eternal love of the Jewish state. This is a truism.

Or so it was until Sanders turned the tables and changed the rules. We do not know yet whether the game will succeed and he will be anointed the next President . We do not know even whether he will snatch the Democrats' nomination from the teeth of Mrs. Clinton. But he already achieved a great victory and toppled the mainstay pillar of the regime.

It is fitting that a Jew would undo the Jewish hegemony in the US, as it was a Communist Gorbachev who undid the Communist rule in the USSR. Some systems are too strong and impervious for an outside force; it is the inner impulse that breaks the hatching egg.

I doubt that Sanders, by himself, changed much when it comes to this aspect of USA politics. At the very least, such overreaching assessments could do well with a bit of caution.

The demographics of the USA may, by themselves, dictate changes with regard to various pro-Israeli lobbies. To make things even more complicated, the demographics of the Jewish minority in the USA are changing - less secular Jews (regardless of their political orientation) and a rise of Orthodox communities. To date, these have largely stayed out of politics - but that changes as well, although hard to be sure how things will pan out. This was discussed at some length a while back, I think.

Either way, not very likely to have much of an impact short term.

[Jingthing]

Biden's criticism of Netanyahu's government and Bernie Sanders' obvious dislike for radical Zionism are very positive developments for the prospect of peace in the Middle East.

You have to pay obeisance to Israel if you want to become the US President. You have to swear your full compliance with Israel's demands. You have to run to AIPAC and declare your eternal love of the Jewish state. This is a truism.

Or so it was until Sanders turned the tables and changed the rules. We do not know yet whether the game will succeed and he will be anointed the next President . We do not know even whether he will snatch the Democrats' nomination from the teeth of Mrs. Clinton. But he already achieved a great victory and toppled the mainstay pillar of the regime.

It is fitting that a Jew would undo the Jewish hegemony in the US, as it was a Communist Gorbachev who undid the Communist rule in the USSR. Some systems are too strong and impervious for an outside force; it is the inner impulse that breaks the hatching egg.

I doubt that Sanders, by himself, changed much when it comes to this aspect of USA politics. At the very least, such overreaching assessments could do well with a bit of caution.

The demographics of the USA may, by themselves, dictate changes with regard to various pro-Israeli lobbies. To make things even more complicated, the demographics of the Jewish minority in the USA are changing - less secular Jews (regardless of their political orientation) and a rise of Orthodox communities. To date, these have largely stayed out of politics - but that changes as well, although hard to be sure how things will pan out. This was discussed at some length a while back, I think.

Either way, not very likely to have much of an impact short term.

I think the most significant potential harbinger of change towards the USA being less committed to Israel is the rise of the Latino demographic. It's not that they're particularly hostile towards Israel, but a quick growing group and less supportive than previous demographic profiles.

I agree with you though, that the Sanders impact will not be significant. His rhetoric is what you would usually expect from far leftist American, even one that happens to be an ethnic Jew.

Will it impact on Hillary Clinton, the likely president elect. No way and she is positioned to the right of Obama on being supportive to Israel.

Sure, some hard core Feel the Bernies won't vote for Hillary, but not likely very many over Israel policy.

Edited April 21, 2016 by Jingthing

[Morch]

The only way that Israel can have a Jewish majority is if they live within their internationally recognized 1967 borders.

More and more Israelis are beginning to see that the Likudniks are more of a threat than their worst enemies ever were.

More and more Israelis are coming to recognize there are no immediate prospects of a two state solution and physical separation is the only viable interim option. This comes from the opposition leader Herzog, who claims 65% of Israelis favour this approach.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/29/opinion/international/only-separation-can-lead-to-a-two-state-solution.html?_r=0

I would estimate it would take two generations of separation before the barriers could come down, If the incitement stopped today.

@DeaconJohn

The first sentence is correct, the second is not.

That's pretty much what frustrated Biden. The supposedly obvious conclusion eludes the Israeli electorate time after time.

There are many reasons for that, not least of which are Palestinian actions and the Israeli left wing's political incompetence.

@Steely Dan

Herzog may claim what he likes, but basically he's just pandering to the centrist-right voters, in a futile attempt to style himself an alternative. Anyone recalling the last Israeli elections would do well to treat claims of popular support by Herzog as somewhat suspect. Of course, if the same idea was dished by a right wing security oriented leader (as in Sharon's case), things could be different.

[Morch]

Yes, but I think there is SOME truth to the leftist perspective that Israel will become less democratic if a two state solution can't somehow be engineered. (And yes that would require the political will on BOTH sides which currently does not exist on EITHER side.)

What isn't true is that Israel will ever accept a one state solution where they allow Jews to be a minority or EVER given up BASIC and CORE "Zionist" (in a GOOD way) values of universal right of return for Jews. The Israel demonization agenda is so obvious -- the end of Israel as a Jewish majority nation state, one way or another.

Sorry haters on Israel -- Israelis may be a lot of things, but they are not STUPID or particularly SUICIDAL.

Is it desirable for Israel to be less democratic and more right wing? No, of course not.

But that is more desirable than Israel NOT existing and an Israel without a Jewish majority means Israel no longer exists.

>>The Israel demonization agenda is so obvious -- the end of Israel as a Jewish majority nation state, one way or another.

Absolutely. Got it in one [..year's worth of posting!] A return to a Palestine of mixed religions exactly as it was 100 years ago, before European Zionist colonialists invaded to take over and dominate the land.

And that is exactly what will happen sooner or later.

Israel can do it the easy way or the messy way, as Joe Biden hinted at in the OP.

The easy way. Make peace with the Palestinians in a just 2 state solution. If the deal offered isn't just and fair the Palestinians will say no and the world will support them. The conflict festers on while the demographic problem grows.

The messy way. Continued land grabs by the right wing Zionist fanatics, continued repression of Palestinian human rights, continued resistance from freedom fighters. Increased global awareness through the international and social media of the great Zionist hoax: Israel plays the role of victim when they are in fact the aggressor. The conflict festers on while the demographic problem grows. Eventual capitulation from Israel due to internal and external pressure that forces a just 2 state solution. But that offer may no longer be on the table.

Either way, after decades of peace the two peoples will gradually and inevitably assimilate into one country. Especially if they both end up joining any free movement organisations such as the EU.

What isn't true is that Israel will ever accept a one state solution where they allow Jews to be a minority or EVER given up BASIC and CORE "Zionist" (in a GOOD way) values of universal right of return for Jews.

There you have it folks. Replace a few of the words and you have the manifesto of many racist/religionist regimes that have existed historically. Israel must maintain racial/religionist supremacy at all costs.

In fact I know of no other country in the world which automatically grants citizenship and a second passport solely for religious reasons.

The Time Machine is fiction.

Essentially, you affirm your wish to see Israel eradicated, and a new country (which will obviously not be Israel) to take its place. You wish to see Jews in Israel (or, perhaps New Palestine) as a tiny minority, only this time without even the semblance of protection afforded by the Ottomans or the Brits. Yeah, that would work....

Guess while at it, you'd have all previous Israeli Jews denounce Zionism, sent to attitude adjustment camps or deported. Other minorities (Druze coming to mind) will have to fend for themselves.

Continuing on the same political trajectory, Israel will obviously come to a point where things with the Palestinians will need to be addressed. Right now, there are no signs of major changes in policy. It may frustrate Biden, but it is what it is. Frankly, even if such changes were to magically materialize, it is doubtful that they could be swiftly acted upon or that their application would bring about the imagined results any time soon.

Your assumptions regarding the future bargaining power and resilience of the Palestinians are based on conditions remaining similar to current ones (meaning regionally and domestically). This being the Middle East, the weight of such long term predictions with regard to anything is questionable, even if it was pronounced less biased. Nothing is more indicative of the the value of such statements than the "after decades of peace" bit.... (or assuming that the EU would be around at that time).

What JT is about is quite simple. If faced between a choice between eradication and not being an ideal democracy, Israel would go with the latter. As would most countries. Of course, no issues whatsoever with the Palestinians dreaming of enacting pretty much the same policies...

[dexterm]

Yes, but I think there is SOME truth to the leftist perspective that Israel will become less democratic if a two state solution can't somehow be engineered. (And yes that would require the political will on BOTH sides which currently does not exist on EITHER side.)

What isn't true is that Israel will ever accept a one state solution where they allow Jews to be a minority or EVER given up BASIC and CORE "Zionist" (in a GOOD way) values of universal right of return for Jews. The Israel demonization agenda is so obvious -- the end of Israel as a Jewish majority nation state, one way or another.

Sorry haters on Israel -- Israelis may be a lot of things, but they are not STUPID or particularly SUICIDAL.

Is it desirable for Israel to be less democratic and more right wing? No, of course not.

But that is more desirable than Israel NOT existing and an Israel without a Jewish majority means Israel no longer exists.

>>The Israel demonization agenda is so obvious -- the end of Israel as a Jewish majority nation state, one way or another.

Absolutely. Got it in one [..year's worth of posting!] A return to a Palestine of mixed religions exactly as it was 100 years ago, before European Zionist colonialists invaded to take over and dominate the land.

And that is exactly what will happen sooner or later.

Israel can do it the easy way or the messy way, as Joe Biden hinted at in the OP.

The easy way. Make peace with the Palestinians in a just 2 state solution. If the deal offered isn't just and fair the Palestinians will say no and the world will support them. The conflict festers on while the demographic problem grows.

The messy way. Continued land grabs by the right wing Zionist fanatics, continued repression of Palestinian human rights, continued resistance from freedom fighters. Increased global awareness through the international and social media of the great Zionist hoax: Israel plays the role of victim when they are in fact the aggressor. The conflict festers on while the demographic problem grows. Eventual capitulation from Israel due to internal and external pressure that forces a just 2 state solution. But that offer may no longer be on the table.

Either way, after decades of peace the two peoples will gradually and inevitably assimilate into one country. Especially if they both end up joining any free movement organisations such as the EU.

What isn't true is that Israel will ever accept a one state solution where they allow Jews to be a minority or EVER given up BASIC and CORE "Zionist" (in a GOOD way) values of universal right of return for Jews.

There you have it folks. Replace a few of the words and you have the manifesto of many racist/religionist regimes that have existed historically. Israel must maintain racial/religionist supremacy at all costs.

In fact I know of no other country in the world which automatically grants citizenship and a second passport solely for religious reasons.

The Time Machine is fiction.

Essentially, you affirm your wish to see Israel eradicated, and a new country (which will obviously not be Israel) to take its place. You wish to see Jews in Israel (or, perhaps New Palestine) as a tiny minority, only this time without even the semblance of protection afforded by the Ottomans or the Brits. Yeah, that would work....

Guess while at it, you'd have all previous Israeli Jews denounce Zionism, sent to attitude adjustment camps or deported. Other minorities (Druze coming to mind) will have to fend for themselves.

Continuing on the same political trajectory, Israel will obviously come to a point where things with the Palestinians will need to be addressed. Right now, there are no signs of major changes in policy. It may frustrate Biden, but it is what it is. Frankly, even if such changes were to magically materialize, it is doubtful that they could be swiftly acted upon or that their application would bring about the imagined results any time soon.

Your assumptions regarding the future bargaining power and resilience of the Palestinians are based on conditions remaining similar to current ones (meaning regionally and domestically). This being the Middle East, the weight of such long term predictions with regard to anything is questionable, even if it was pronounced less biased. Nothing is more indicative of the the value of such statements than the "after decades of peace" bit.... (or assuming that the EU would be around at that time).

What JT is about is quite simple. If faced between a choice between eradication and not being an ideal democracy, Israel would go with the latter. As would most countries. Of course, no issues whatsoever with the Palestinians dreaming of enacting pretty much the same policies...

It's very handy this one fits all word "Zionist".. ..can be used to bludgeon TV members by accusing them of speaking in code, can be dismissed as rhetorical ideological categorization (whatever that is) even when crystal clearly defined by me and even the founding fathers of Zionism, and can be something warm and fuzzy yet somehow indefinable when describing a young Israeli politician.

I would suggest that you and others stop criticizing TV members for using the word, when they are willing to state exactly what they mean by it, while you cannot or will not.

I will continue to name people as Zionists as I clearly defined it: those who believe in a Jewish State and the free migration of Jews into Palestine based solely on their race/religion, while denying similar rights to Palestinians. Now if you want to hear something else, when I use the word, that's your problem not mine.

You may wish to see morality and democracy in terms of gray and concern yourself with the minutiae of day to day achievability while fence sitting, I prefer to aim for ideals. IMO you lack vision.

Interesting that you accuse me of seeing the world purely in black and white, then misquote my "after decades of peace [in a 2 state solution] the two peoples will gradually and inevitably assimilate into one country" and ramble on with extreme hyperbole about sending Zionists to attitude adjustment camps or deportation as though it were going to happen overnight in an all or nothing situation. Pure obfuscation.

If as Joe Biden points out Israel faces future difficulties in accommodating Palestinian refugees and/or losing their Jewish majority, remember: this a problem of Israel's own making. Palestinians did not invite Zionists to come to Palestine to colonize it and ethnically cleanse the resident population in order to maintain a Jewish majority. They have had a pretty good run for the last 70 years.The chickens are now coming home to roost.

Edited April 22, 2016 by dexterm

[JingerBen]

Yes, but I think there is SOME truth to the leftist perspective that Israel will become less democratic if a two state solution can't somehow be engineered. (And yes that would require the political will on BOTH sides which currently does not exist on EITHER side.)

What isn't true is that Israel will ever accept a one state solution where they allow Jews to be a minority or EVER given up BASIC and CORE "Zionist" (in a GOOD way) values of universal right of return for Jews. The Israel demonization agenda is so obvious -- the end of Israel as a Jewish majority nation state, one way or another.

Sorry haters on Israel -- Israelis may be a lot of things, but they are not STUPID or particularly SUICIDAL.

Is it desirable for Israel to be less democratic and more right wing? No, of course not.

But that is more desirable than Israel NOT existing and an Israel without a Jewish majority means Israel no longer exists.

>>The Israel demonization agenda is so obvious -- the end of Israel as a Jewish majority nation state, one way or another.

Absolutely. Got it in one [..year's worth of posting!] A return to a Palestine of mixed religions exactly as it was 100 years ago, before European Zionist colonialists invaded to take over and dominate the land.

And that is exactly what will happen sooner or later.

Israel can do it the easy way or the messy way, as Joe Biden hinted at in the OP.

The easy way. Make peace with the Palestinians in a just 2 state solution. If the deal offered isn't just and fair the Palestinians will say no and the world will support them. The conflict festers on while the demographic problem grows.

The messy way. Continued land grabs by the right wing Zionist fanatics, continued repression of Palestinian human rights, continued resistance from freedom fighters. Increased global awareness through the international and social media of the great Zionist hoax: Israel plays the role of victim when they are in fact the aggressor. The conflict festers on while the demographic problem grows. Eventual capitulation from Israel due to internal and external pressure that forces a just 2 state solution. But that offer may no longer be on the table.

Either way, after decades of peace the two peoples will gradually and inevitably assimilate into one country. Especially if they both end up joining any free movement organisations such as the EU.

What isn't true is that Israel will ever accept a one state solution where they allow Jews to be a minority or EVER given up BASIC and CORE "Zionist" (in a GOOD way) values of universal right of return for Jews.

There you have it folks. Replace a few of the words and you have the manifesto of many racist/religionist regimes that have existed historically. Israel must maintain racial/religionist supremacy at all costs.

In fact I know of no other country in the world which automatically grants citizenship and a second passport solely for religious reasons.

The Time Machine is fiction.

Essentially, you affirm your wish to see Israel eradicated, and a new country (which will obviously not be Israel) to take its place. You wish to see Jews in Israel (or, perhaps New Palestine) as a tiny minority, only this time without even the semblance of protection afforded by the Ottomans or the Brits. Yeah, that would work....

Guess while at it, you'd have all previous Israeli Jews denounce Zionism, sent to attitude adjustment camps or deported. Other minorities (Druze coming to mind) will have to fend for themselves.

Continuing on the same political trajectory, Israel will obviously come to a point where things with the Palestinians will need to be addressed. Right now, there are no signs of major changes in policy. It may frustrate Biden, but it is what it is. Frankly, even if such changes were to magically materialize, it is doubtful that they could be swiftly acted upon or that their application would bring about the imagined results any time soon.

Your assumptions regarding the future bargaining power and resilience of the Palestinians are based on conditions remaining similar to current ones (meaning regionally and domestically). This being the Middle East, the weight of such long term predictions with regard to anything is questionable, even if it was pronounced less biased. Nothing is more indicative of the the value of such statements than the "after decades of peace" bit.... (or assuming that the EU would be around at that time).

What JT is about is quite simple. If faced between a choice between eradication and not being an ideal democracy, Israel would go with the latter. As would most countries. Of course, no issues whatsoever with the Palestinians dreaming of enacting pretty much the same policies...

"Essentially, you affirm your wish to see Israel eradicated..."

No, that wasn't what he said at all.

His point was that Israel is the only country in the world that automatically grants citizenship and a second passport solely for religious reasons.

Is that true? Refute that simple statement convincingly before wandering off into the fog of propaganda.

[Ulysses G.]

"Essentially, you affirm your wish to see Israel eradicated..."

No, that wasn't what he said at all.

Anyone who reads him regularly - and is honest - knows that is exactly what he would like to see.

[JingerBen]

"Essentially, you affirm your wish to see Israel eradicated..."

No, that wasn't what he said at all.

Anyone who reads him regularly - and is honest - knows that is exactly what he would like to see.

Hogwash.

His posts are intelligent and factual.

It's the resident Zionists on this forum that deal in personal insults to push a dishonest agenda.

Reply to his point, don't denigrate his character.

[dexterm]

"Essentially, you affirm your wish to see Israel eradicated..."

No, that wasn't what he said at all.

Anyone who reads him regularly - and is honest - knows that is exactly what he would like to see.

I have previously challenged you to produce evidence of your misconceptions of my posts. But as always the silence is deafening.

[Ulysses G.]

"Essentially, you affirm your wish to see Israel eradicated..."

No, that wasn't what he said at all.

Anyone who reads him regularly - and is honest - knows that is exactly what he would like to see.

Hogwash.

His posts are intelligent and factual.

It's the resident Zionists on this forum that deal in personal insults to push a dishonest agenda.

Reply to his point, don't denigrate his character.

I have proved numerous times that he is posting incorrect information, with links from credible sources as evidence. Many times, I have used his own links to prove his dishonesty. The Israel hating crew are perfectly happy to pretend otherwise and "like" obvious untruths posted by others who share their disease.

Edited April 22, 2016 by Ulysses G.

[Ulysses G.]

"Essentially, you affirm your wish to see Israel eradicated..."

No, that wasn't what he said at all.

Anyone who reads him regularly - and is honest - knows that is exactly what he would like to see.

I have previously challenged you to produce evidence of your misconceptions of my posts. But as always the silence is deafening.

Nonsense. I have done so numerous times. One more thing that you are dishonest about.

[Andaman Al]

Finally a western politician calling a spade a spade. Israel has zero intention of ever allowing

a two state solution.

It's a two way street, J or otherwise.

For that to actually happen, there needs to be good faith direct negotiations between Israel and some kind of legitimate Palestinian leadership. "Palestine" lacks that. Abbas is very unpopular and Hamas are genocidal terrorists. It's so easy to blame only one side. The truth is much more complicated.

'Genocidal'? After the deaths of over 1 million Iraqi's The worlds only 'Genocidal Terrorists' are the Americans and the Brits, aka Bush and Blair.

[Scott]

I strongly suggest that the bickering stop. Stay on the topic, please.

[Steely Dan]

At last an article that hits the nail on the head. Biden is in effect frustrated that the Israeli people don't share his appetite for withdrawal from the West Bank without cast iron guarantees this will lead to a peace treaty, Gaza being a precedent.

https://www.commentarymagazine.com/foreign-policy/middle-east/israel/joe-biden-versus-israeli-people/

Why can’t J Street and the administration see what the overwhelming majority of Israelis see? Perhaps they are too blinded by political bias and by their illusions about the Palestinians. Perhaps they are also too ideologically committed to their critique of Netanyahu to be able to realize that his three consecutive election victories is the consequence of Palestinian choices — which were illustrated yesterday by a bus bombing in Jerusalem and the discovery of a new terror tunnel that reached into Israel from Gaza

The settlements red herring is disingenuous nonsense seeing as less settlement expansion has taken place under Netanyahu than under the three previous governments. Also nearly all of the settlement expansion is on land that even the US conceded should remain under Israeli control due to land swaps.

Edited April 22, 2016 by Steely Dan

[Morch]

The Time Machine is fiction.

Essentially, you affirm your wish to see Israel eradicated, and a new country (which will obviously not be Israel) to take its place. You wish to see Jews in Israel (or, perhaps New Palestine) as a tiny minority, only this time without even the semblance of protection afforded by the Ottomans or the Brits. Yeah, that would work....

Guess while at it, you'd have all previous Israeli Jews denounce Zionism, sent to attitude adjustment camps or deported. Other minorities (Druze coming to mind) will have to fend for themselves.

Continuing on the same political trajectory, Israel will obviously come to a point where things with the Palestinians will need to be addressed. Right now, there are no signs of major changes in policy. It may frustrate Biden, but it is what it is. Frankly, even if such changes were to magically materialize, it is doubtful that they could be swiftly acted upon or that their application would bring about the imagined results any time soon.

Your assumptions regarding the future bargaining power and resilience of the Palestinians are based on conditions remaining similar to current ones (meaning regionally and domestically). This being the Middle East, the weight of such long term predictions with regard to anything is questionable, even if it was pronounced less biased. Nothing is more indicative of the the value of such statements than the "after decades of peace" bit.... (or assuming that the EU would be around at that time).

What JT is about is quite simple. If faced between a choice between eradication and not being an ideal democracy, Israel would go with the latter. As would most countries. Of course, no issues whatsoever with the Palestinians dreaming of enacting pretty much the same policies...

It's very handy this one fits all word "Zionist".. ..can be used to bludgeon TV members by accusing them of speaking in code, can be dismissed as rhetorical ideological categorization (whatever that is) even when crystal clearly defined by me and even the founding fathers of Zionism, and can be something warm and fuzzy yet somehow indefinable when describing a young Israeli politician.

I would suggest that you and others stop criticizing TV members for using the word, when they are willing to state exactly what they mean by it, while you cannot or will not.

I will continue to name people as Zionists as I clearly defined it: those who believe in a Jewish State and the free migration of Jews into Palestine based solely on their race/religion, while denying similar rights to Palestinians. Now if you want to hear something else, when I use the word, that's your problem not mine.

You may wish to see morality and democracy in terms of gray and concern yourself with the minutiae of day to day achievability while fence sitting, I prefer to aim for ideals. IMO you lack vision.

Interesting that you accuse me of seeing the world purely in black and white, then misquote my "after decades of peace [in a 2 state solution] the two peoples will gradually and inevitably assimilate into one country" and ramble on with extreme hyperbole about sending Zionists to attitude adjustment camps or deportation as though it were going to happen overnight in an all or nothing situation. Pure obfuscation.

If as Joe Biden points out Israel faces future difficulties in accommodating Palestinian refugees and/or losing their Jewish majority, remember: this a problem of Israel's own making. Palestinians did not invite Zionists to come to Palestine to colonize it and ethnically cleanse the resident population in order to maintain a Jewish majority. They have had a pretty good run for the last 70 years.The chickens are now coming home to roost.

Zionist, as a term, is not different than any other ideological or political definition. Meaning that it is a general concept incorporating multiple variants. Insisting otherwise is either is all very well, but even the OP indicates otherwise. Rather than cling to so-called early days definitions, and pretend that they never evolved, it would be better to explore current trends, which may prove more conductive to achieving a solution.

The only reason to persist with holding monolithic views of Zionism is that it serves to discredit anyone from the other side who does not fully conform to your radical views. Seems like the main goal is to denounce Zionism as a whole, rather than promote a compromise between Palestinian aspirations and moderate versions of Zionism. That this leads to prolonging the conflict and fosters hate between sides does not seem to be a concern,

Holding such a position while applauding Biden's speech is odd, considering it clearly exhibits a differentiation between various modes of ideological and political thought in Israel. This is evident from the title of the OP, the content of the speech and its closing remark on an Israeli opposition MP.

Lets take this a step further. According to you there are no meaningful variations within Zionism, it's all bad. Also, expression of support to Zionist ideas or movements is denounced. Voting would probably be counted as such an expression of support. The only political parties in Israel not holding Zionist notions represent Arab or Jewish Orthodox voter. The offshoot, most of the Israeli electorate (and especially the Jewish segment) is to be rejected and discredited. That's all very well for propaganda purposes, but not very constructive with regards to solving the conflict. Sort of like painting all the Palestinians as blood thirsty murderers.

As for having a black and white view of democracy - you seem to imply that there's a clear list of conditions defining democracy which are upheld by all countries claiming to be such and are not routinely criticized by you. well, posting this while living in Thailand is kinda rich, and does bring another prolific poster to mind.

Accusing me of a misquote while misquoting me on the very first line of your own post is also pretty routing. What I was pointing at is that envisaging "decades of peace" (not a misquote, just a partial one) does not indicate much connection with the realities of the Middle East. Furthermore, it is doubtful that such one state solution will actually peacefully mature to fulfill that rosy dream.

There is very little interest, from both sides, in your version of one state solution. Pretending otherwise is dishonesty. The Palestinians are not into united co-existence any more than the Israelis are. That does not make the demographic issues disappear, of course, but it does not spell anything benign for the future.

And still, not a word on Biden's criticism of the Palestinians, which does appear in the OP.

[dexterm]

The Time Machine is fiction.

Essentially, you affirm your wish to see Israel eradicated, and a new country (which will obviously not be Israel) to take its place. You wish to see Jews in Israel (or, perhaps New Palestine) as a tiny minority, only this time without even the semblance of protection afforded by the Ottomans or the Brits. Yeah, that would work....

Guess while at it, you'd have all previous Israeli Jews denounce Zionism, sent to attitude adjustment camps or deported. Other minorities (Druze coming to mind) will have to fend for themselves.

Continuing on the same political trajectory, Israel will obviously come to a point where things with the Palestinians will need to be addressed. Right now, there are no signs of major changes in policy. It may frustrate Biden, but it is what it is. Frankly, even if such changes were to magically materialize, it is doubtful that they could be swiftly acted upon or that their application would bring about the imagined results any time soon.

Your assumptions regarding the future bargaining power and resilience of the Palestinians are based on conditions remaining similar to current ones (meaning regionally and domestically). This being the Middle East, the weight of such long term predictions with regard to anything is questionable, even if it was pronounced less biased. Nothing is more indicative of the the value of such statements than the "after decades of peace" bit.... (or assuming that the EU would be around at that time).

What JT is about is quite simple. If faced between a choice between eradication and not being an ideal democracy, Israel would go with the latter. As would most countries. Of course, no issues whatsoever with the Palestinians dreaming of enacting pretty much the same policies...

It's very handy this one fits all word "Zionist".. ..can be used to bludgeon TV members by accusing them of speaking in code, can be dismissed as rhetorical ideological categorization (whatever that is) even when crystal clearly defined by me and even the founding fathers of Zionism, and can be something warm and fuzzy yet somehow indefinable when describing a young Israeli politician.

I would suggest that you and others stop criticizing TV members for using the word, when they are willing to state exactly what they mean by it, while you cannot or will not.

I will continue to name people as Zionists as I clearly defined it: those who believe in a Jewish State and the free migration of Jews into Palestine based solely on their race/religion, while denying similar rights to Palestinians. Now if you want to hear something else, when I use the word, that's your problem not mine.

You may wish to see morality and democracy in terms of gray and concern yourself with the minutiae of day to day achievability while fence sitting, I prefer to aim for ideals. IMO you lack vision.

Interesting that you accuse me of seeing the world purely in black and white, then misquote my "after decades of peace [in a 2 state solution] the two peoples will gradually and inevitably assimilate into one country" and ramble on with extreme hyperbole about sending Zionists to attitude adjustment camps or deportation as though it were going to happen overnight in an all or nothing situation. Pure obfuscation.

If as Joe Biden points out Israel faces future difficulties in accommodating Palestinian refugees and/or losing their Jewish majority, remember: this a problem of Israel's own making. Palestinians did not invite Zionists to come to Palestine to colonize it and ethnically cleanse the resident population in order to maintain a Jewish majority. They have had a pretty good run for the last 70 years.The chickens are now coming home to roost.

Zionist, as a term, is not different than any other ideological or political definition. Meaning that it is a general concept incorporating multiple variants. Insisting otherwise is either is all very well, but even the OP indicates otherwise. Rather than cling to so-called early days definitions, and pretend that they never evolved, it would be better to explore current trends, which may prove more conductive to achieving a solution.

The only reason to persist with holding monolithic views of Zionism is that it serves to discredit anyone from the other side who does not fully conform to your radical views. Seems like the main goal is to denounce Zionism as a whole, rather than promote a compromise between Palestinian aspirations and moderate versions of Zionism. That this leads to prolonging the conflict and fosters hate between sides does not seem to be a concern,

Holding such a position while applauding Biden's speech is odd, considering it clearly exhibits a differentiation between various modes of ideological and political thought in Israel. This is evident from the title of the OP, the content of the speech and its closing remark on an Israeli opposition MP.

Lets take this a step further. According to you there are no meaningful variations within Zionism, it's all bad. Also, expression of support to Zionist ideas or movements is denounced. Voting would probably be counted as such an expression of support. The only political parties in Israel not holding Zionist notions represent Arab or Jewish Orthodox voter. The offshoot, most of the Israeli electorate (and especially the Jewish segment) is to be rejected and discredited. That's all very well for propaganda purposes, but not very constructive with regards to solving the conflict. Sort of like painting all the Palestinians as blood thirsty murderers.

As for having a black and white view of democracy - you seem to imply that there's a clear list of conditions defining democracy which are upheld by all countries claiming to be such and are not routinely criticized by you. well, posting this while living in Thailand is kinda rich, and does bring another prolific poster to mind.

Accusing me of a misquote while misquoting me on the very first line of your own post is also pretty routing. What I was pointing at is that envisaging "decades of peace" (not a misquote, just a partial one) does not indicate much connection with the realities of the Middle East. Furthermore, it is doubtful that such one state solution will actually peacefully mature to fulfill that rosy dream.

There is very little interest, from both sides, in your version of one state solution. Pretending otherwise is dishonesty. The Palestinians are not into united co-existence any more than the Israelis are. That does not make the demographic issues disappear, of course, but it does not spell anything benign for the future.

And still, not a word on Biden's criticism of the Palestinians, which does appear in the OP.

>>According to you there are no meaningful variations within Zionism, it's all bad.

You are misquoting or misunderstanding me.

How can I make it clear to you?

I am stating what I personally mean when I use the word Zionist to help you and others understand what it is exactly that I am criticizing to avoid confusion. It saves me repeatedly saying I object to a Jewish state and Israel's near exclusive Jewish immigration policy to maintain Jewish demographic and thus power superiority. I can use one word instead of 21. If Zionism means something else to you, fine. If it means something else to Joe Biden, fine. If it means something else to Stav Shaffier, fine.

I am not implying that my definition is the universal monolithic version.

>>The Palestinians are not into united co-existence any more than the Israelis are.

I am not familiar with any serious research on that. But I will take your word for it.

But if that is the case, as Joe Biden warns in the OP, Israel had better get its skates on to offer the Palestinians a viable just 2 state solution because the demographic problems are increasing for them, and if Netanyahu's right wing government continues the way it is, the problems are only going to get worse.

I didn't know that it was obligatory to comment on every single sentence in an OP. But perhaps it's because I disagree with Biden's criticism of the Palestinians.

[Morch]

The Time Machine is fiction.

Essentially, you affirm your wish to see Israel eradicated, and a new country (which will obviously not be Israel) to take its place. You wish to see Jews in Israel (or, perhaps New Palestine) as a tiny minority, only this time without even the semblance of protection afforded by the Ottomans or the Brits. Yeah, that would work....

Guess while at it, you'd have all previous Israeli Jews denounce Zionism, sent to attitude adjustment camps or deported. Other minorities (Druze coming to mind) will have to fend for themselves.

Continuing on the same political trajectory, Israel will obviously come to a point where things with the Palestinians will need to be addressed. Right now, there are no signs of major changes in policy. It may frustrate Biden, but it is what it is. Frankly, even if such changes were to magically materialize, it is doubtful that they could be swiftly acted upon or that their application would bring about the imagined results any time soon.

Your assumptions regarding the future bargaining power and resilience of the Palestinians are based on conditions remaining similar to current ones (meaning regionally and domestically). This being the Middle East, the weight of such long term predictions with regard to anything is questionable, even if it was pronounced less biased. Nothing is more indicative of the the value of such statements than the "after decades of peace" bit.... (or assuming that the EU would be around at that time).

What JT is about is quite simple. If faced between a choice between eradication and not being an ideal democracy, Israel would go with the latter. As would most countries. Of course, no issues whatsoever with the Palestinians dreaming of enacting pretty much the same policies...

"Essentially, you affirm your wish to see Israel eradicated..."

No, that wasn't what he said at all.

His point was that Israel is the only country in the world that automatically grants citizenship and a second passport solely for religious reasons.

Is that true? Refute that simple statement convincingly before wandering off into the fog of propaganda.

Wishing for things to go back to how they were a 100 years ago effectively means that there is no Israel. Israel, without having a Jewish majority or disconnected from its Jewish heritage will not be Israel.

There was no peaceful coexistence without the presence of an foreign ruler (Ottoman and British empires) to keep things in check. There is no precedent for peaceful, stable multicultural countries in the Middle East, and no particular reason to assume this case would be any different.

There is no one state solution which leaves Israel an Israel.

Wandering off would be introducing a secondary point (as in Israel's controversial Law of Return) and claiming it to be the crux. Could call it propaganda as well.

In case you (and others) missed it, I'm not among those claiming Israel is a paragon of democracy, but rather that it is an imperfect one. It is a balance between survival and conforming to Western ideals, and bound to fall short of some expectations.

The Palestinian notion regarding Right of Return isn't much different. The relevant parts of the Palestinian constitution and law indicate that citizenship will not be afforded to Israeli Jews. On the other hand, Palestinians residing in Israel post 1948 were (generally) granted citizenship. Guessing that's not much of an issue, and would be dubbed propaganda or some such. Wonder how Biden's comments on the Palestinians (appearing in the OP) are taken.