Netanyahu reshuffle means Israel being taken over by ‘extremists’

[ilostmypassword]

I think it is a good move. Nothing like a little short term pain for long term gain so to speak. In the long term it is sure to alienate this administration even further with the plethora of Western democracies that are already voicing their concerns with Israel's ongoing oppression of Palestine. Go ahead Benjamin.

The western democracies you mention are rapidly losing any leverage they had with Israel. Lieberman or no Lieberman there are moves afoot which will culminate in peace between Israel and her Arab neighbors, I guess western leftists will then miraculously start taking an interest in their human rights records.

http://m.jpost.com/Israel-News/Politics-And-Diplomacy/Arab-governments-to-Netanyahu-Lets-talk-about-the-Saudi-peace-initiative-454559

Actually, I think what's going on here is that Netanyahu is playing the Sunni Arab nations just the way he has played the Western nations. He talks about being willing to negotiate but his actions speak otherwise. He's playing for time. Netanyahu is doing this because his real target here is Iran. So promise anything but coordinate actions against the Iranians. The only problem is that having indoctrinated their citizenry with anti-semitic poison for about 70 years, the Arab nations may face an uprising at home if their alliance with Israel becomes too evident. If you want to read a good report of this anti-semitic mindset. get a copy of Richard Engel's latest book. He learned Arabic by living in Egypt among the poor so he has real insight into how the Egyptian masses think and live. Anti-semitism is everywhere and it's fostered by the government. And Egypt has a peace treaty with Israel!

[Morch]

There are mainly 2 reasons why Mosh Ya'alon wanted to quit from his Defense minister position.

https://www.rt.com/news/343713-netanyahu-lieberman-defense-reaction/

"The controversial decision to appoint Lieberman to the post of defense chief was preceded by a row between Netanyahu and Ya’alon, who backed the prosecution of Elor Azaria, an Israeli soldier who shot an unarmed Palestinian attacker back in March. In contrast, Netanyahu personally expressed support for the family of the soldier, who is now on trial for manslaughter."

"The rift deepened after Ya’alon backed Major General Yair Golan, who drew parallels between tendencies in Nazi Germany and present day Israel in a speech devoted to Holocaust Remembrance Day."

Still not clear why Netanyahu called in Avigdor Lieberman with no military experience at all.

The outgoing Israeli Defense minister did not so much quit as was being shown the way out. He did not quit prior to being informed of the political deal between Lieberman and Netanyahu, and under other circumstances would not have budged an inch from his ministerial seat. Whatever differences there were between Yaalon and Netanyahu, they did not amount to enough of an issue for either to risk political upheaval. Whether one wishes to see Yaalon going on despite these differences as a pragmatic or a responsible course of action is a matter of choice.

Lieberman's lack of relevant experience is immaterial for Netanyahu when his own political survival is on the line. Here's a copy of an earlier post from another topic:

Netanyahu's foremost consideration is political survival. Taking Yaalon out of the equation allows him to add Lieberman's Party and bolster his narrow coalition. It also serves getting rid of a potential political rival within his own party.

A few extra bonus points:

Throw the opposition into disarray. Netanyahu was simultaneously negotiating with the main centrist-left party for a similar move. This was controversial to begin with, and as it came to naught, backstabbing and score settling over there.

No hassle from Lieberman's criticism as vocal opposition. The new deal specifies certain domestic issues will not be raised during the government's term.

Less domestic pressure when rejecting peace initiatives. Can always cite coalition restrictions, pose as a relative moderate and blame those who did not join his coalition (see first point).

[Morch]

I think it is a good move. Nothing like a little short term pain for long term gain so to speak. In the long term it is sure to alienate this administration even further with the plethora of Western democracies that are already voicing their concerns with Israel's ongoing oppression of Palestine. Go ahead Benjamin.

Lieberman or no Lieberman there are moves afoot which will culminate in peace between Israel and her Arab neighbors, .

http://m.jpost.com/Israel-News/Politics-And-Diplomacy/Arab-governments-to-Netanyahu-Lets-talk-about-the-Saudi-peace-initiative-454559

Unfortunately I don't share your optimism. I can't see that happening whilst people like Lieberman and Netanyahu are calling the shots. They may be very good at sounding the peace drum, as most Israeli politicians and political commentators are. But when push comes to shove, when it is time to stop the settlements, to reprimand illegal IDF killing of innocent civilians to give back Palestinian land that was illegally obtained etc etc, , then they fail miserably.

Same old story with these guys. The old line of "yes we want peace with our Arab neighbours. But we are not going to make the concessions required to achieve it". Israeli political implosion may be the only road that will lead to peace. And that will take a long long time.

Israel's peace agreement with Egypt was signed under a Likud led government, headed by Begin. Jordan too, got a long standing peace agreement in place with Israel. Israel's unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip took place under Sharon's government. Granted that the current Israeli leadership is not up for making the decisions required, but making it into a blanket argument with regard to Israeli intransigence is off mark. Rather, more a prolonged leadership crisis issue.

And as a usual reminder, takes two to tango - not much willingness or ability to deliver evident on the Palestinian side.

Hard to tell what "Israel's political implosion" means, but not too hard to guess that its outcome would not be peaceful.

[CharlieH]

Post removed and response to it.

Fair use requires a few lines and a link to the original article.

Not to copy and paste an entire article.

[Jingthing]

Take a look at the Israeli settlements in the West Bank connected by Israeli-only roads and the Palestinian bantustans isolated by military checkpoints and you would have to be blind not to see apartheid with a capital "A".

The non-Arabic, non-Hebrew word "bantustan" obviously used for maximum Israel demonization propaganda purposes to push the lie that Israel is equivalent to apartheid era South Africa.

calling a personal opinion a "lie" is ridiculous. but reading your opinions in this forum, in my case nearly a decade, demonstrated clearly that in between rational comments you like to play the unjustified accusation card to silence those who's justified personal opinions differ from yours.

let me tell you a secret... it does not work!

Fair enough, I'll take your first criticism to heart.

Saying all Israeli governments have been extremists is, in my opinion, a BLATANT FALSEHOOD. Better?

As far as attempting to silence others, no, you're totally wrong. I don't have that intention (or power obviously) and you can try to make this thread about your dime store pop psychology about what you think of me, but the topic is not about me, it's actually an ISRAEL related topic.

As far as working or not working -- GET REAL -- everyone knows that the obsessive Israel demonization agenda will NEVER go away as long as Israel exists. DUH!

To clarify because so many people are often confused, normal criticism of Israel as against any other country is not a problem, and to be expected, and is common indeed among Israelis and Jews. ISRAEL DEMONIZATION on the other hand is not normal ... it's toxic and very suspect. Personally, I think an assertion that ALL Israeli governments have been extremist is a demonizing sort of assertion.

Edited May 22, 2016 by Jingthing

[Koosdedooes]

Israel has always been run by extremists.

Not true. The original Labor Party (think Meir and Eban) made their mistakes, such as allowing the first Orthodox settlements in the territories, but they were not extremists and many were capable of dialog with their neighbors in Arabic.

I believe it has a lot to do with an increase in bitter and twisted ex military personnel, with a personal axe to grind at the helm . Especially those in the higher echelons of Israel's political apparatus. Current leader included.

The problem is the political influence upon who is selected for the courses for the higher ranks in the military. I would argue that Begin and Sharon were not able to go into Lebanon (1982) until their selections were in control of most brigades and above. And then this flows back into politics where military prowess is often mistaken, and substituted as political prowess.

There will be no more large scale aliyahs while such extreme right wing policies are in force. Why would American Jewry and others from elsewhere migrate to Israel when they are doing very nicely practising their faith and living secure prosperous peaceful fully integrated lives in the USA and other countries.

One of the few larger scale recent aliyahs have been the extreme right wing orthodox coming out of New York. The larger non-orthodox American Jewish communities are very divided over current Israeli politics and many are in open opposition and trend more towards the position of Gideon Levy (search on Youtube) the Ha'Aretz correspondent who agrees that, in the territories, one sees an apartheid system set up to isolate two communities.

Take a look at the Israeli settlements in the West Bank connected by Israeli-only roads and the Palestinian bantustans isolated by military checkpoints and you would have to be blind not to see apartheid with a capital "A".

Actually what currently exists is far worse than apartheids bantustans,

the Apartheid bantustans never had Military check points around them, they were set up as terrorities for the black inhabitants, declared "indepedent" and were given a partial automony..of course they were set up to get Black Africans out of South Africa by "giving" them their own land, as part of apartheid policy/ideals

but what is factual is that no bantustans were controlled by the south african military via armed guards, check points or razor wire etc..

therefore disagree with the term Palistinian Bantustan...think Palistinian Ghetto would be a better description

[dexterm]

How long has Israel been a country?

How long has Palestine been a country?

Questions due to a very old map in a book I'm reading at the moment. Unfortunately the map is not dated but...it clearly shows Israel and it's borders. There is no Palestine marked.

I'd ask for a refund on your book purchase.

Israel has never defined its borders. They somehow keep expanding.

[DaddyWarbucks]

Just in time for Mental Health Awareness month, along comes the appointment of Avigdor Lieberman, a former Moldovan nightclub bouncer, as Israeli Defense Minister.

There already shouldn't have been any doubt about the orientation of the current Israeli government in blocking any path toward resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It is firmly rightist, dominated by those opposed to the relinquishing of occupied territory or the creation of a Palestinian state.

All honest outside observers should use the report about Lieberman coming into the Israeli government as an occasion to remind themselves that this tragic and long running conflict continues because one side refuses to end it. The gross asymmetry between the two sides is all-important. The side with the firepower has the ability to end the occupation and live within their 1967 borders. The Palestinian side has tried to use violent resistance but has subsequently, and correctly, drawn the conclusion that such violence is not the answer; the violence, unsurprisingly, only stokes legitimate fears among Israelis about their security. Violence has been continuing in the unplanned, spontaneous, and frustration-driven form of young people grabbing knives and stabbing the first Israeli they find.

The Palestinian leadership - in spite of divisions and political weakness - has turned to multilateral diplomacy, which, besides popular boycotts, is about the only tool it has left. And the Israeli government does everything it can to impede and to foil such diplomacy, as it is trying to do now with the French initiative.

The rise of Avigdor Lieberman has shown that as long as third parties do not make them suffer any meaningful consequences, they will not end the occupation and live within their borders.

[Morch]

I'd ask for a refund on your book purchase.

Israel has never defined its borders. They somehow keep expanding.

Only for those overlooking the handing back of the Sinai Peninsula as part of the peace agreement with Egypt. And Israel's unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip.

As for borders not being defined - again, a two way street.

[Morch]

Just in time for Mental Health Awareness month, along comes the appointment of Avigdor Lieberman, a former Moldovan nightclub bouncer, as Israeli Defense Minister.

There already shouldn't have been any doubt about the orientation of the current Israeli government in blocking any path toward resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It is firmly rightist, dominated by those opposed to the relinquishing of occupied territory or the creation of a Palestinian state.

All honest outside observers should use the report about Lieberman coming into the Israeli government as an occasion to remind themselves that this tragic and long running conflict continues because one side refuses to end it. The gross asymmetry between the two sides is all-important. The side with the firepower has the ability to end the occupation and live within their 1967 borders. The Palestinian side has tried to use violent resistance but has subsequently, and correctly, drawn the conclusion that such violence is not the answer; the violence, unsurprisingly, only stokes legitimate fears among Israelis about their security. Violence has been continuing in the unplanned, spontaneous, and frustration-driven form of young people grabbing knives and stabbing the first Israeli they find.

The Palestinian leadership - in spite of divisions and political weakness - has turned to multilateral diplomacy, which, besides popular boycotts, is about the only tool it has left. And the Israeli government does everything it can to impede and to foil such diplomacy, as it is trying to do now with the French initiative.

The rise of Avigdor Lieberman has shown that as long as third parties do not make them suffer any meaningful consequences, they will not end the occupation and live within their borders.

I think most posters miss the problematic part of Lieberman's views. It is less to do with the Palestinians and them having a Palestinian state. more to do with the way Israel treats its Arab citizens. From the whole lot of the current government, Lieberman is probably the most supportive of reaching an agreement with the Palestinians, It is probably not the agreement posters have in mind, and not necessarily something that the Palestinians will go for, but it is not a position denying the possibility of such an outcome.

As for the usual one sided presentations of the conflict - the Palestinians are no more willing than the Israelis, ending the occupation will not bring about instant peace even if it was on offer, the Palestinians did not turn away from violence, glossing over their political divisions is a convenient way to ignore a major difficulty.

The last bit does not follow from the rest of the drivel.

[Jingthing]

Yes and Liberman's intentions towards Israeli Arab citizens cross some pretty despicable lines. On the other hand considering the other sides hopes for a Jew free state you could say they could be worse.

I agree the best hope at least for the next few generations is two states separated but I think most Arab Israelis would wish to stay Israeli. Israel can't expect them ever to be Zionists but Israel has every right to expect them not to be enemies within.

Some are of course but I reckon current Israeli law law can deal with that without getting mishuge into Liberman type stuff.

Edited May 22, 2016 by Jingthing

[dexterm]

I'd ask for a refund on your book purchase.

Israel has never defined its borders. They somehow keep expanding.

Only for those overlooking the handing back of the Sinai Peninsula as part of the peace agreement with Egypt. And Israel's unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip.

As for borders not being defined - again, a two way street.

Complete chicanery. Arafat defined Israel's acceptable borders as the 67 lines....a huge concession already on what Zionists stole since 1947. It is Israel who disputes this by grabbing more land in the West Bank to build their Jewish only colonies.

Edited May 22, 2016 by dexterm

[dexterm]

I think it is a good move. Nothing like a little short term pain for long term gain so to speak. In the long term it is sure to alienate this administration even further with the plethora of Western democracies that are already voicing their concerns with Israel's ongoing oppression of Palestine. Go ahead Benjamin.

Lieberman or no Lieberman there are moves afoot which will culminate in peace between Israel and her Arab neighbors, .

http://m.jpost.com/Israel-News/Politics-And-Diplomacy/Arab-governments-to-Netanyahu-Lets-talk-about-the-Saudi-peace-initiative-454559

Unfortunately I don't share your optimism. I can't see that happening whilst people like Lieberman and Netanyahu are calling the shots. They may be very good at sounding the peace drum, as most Israeli politicians and political commentators are. But when push comes to shove, when it is time to stop the settlements, to reprimand illegal IDF killing of innocent civilians to give back Palestinian land that was illegally obtained etc etc, , then they fail miserably.

Same old story with these guys. The old line of "yes we want peace with our Arab neighbours. But we are not going to make the concessions required to achieve it". Israeli political implosion may be the only road that will lead to peace. And that will take a long long time.

Israel's peace agreement with Egypt was signed under a Likud led government, headed by Begin. Jordan too, got a long standing peace agreement in place with Israel. Israel's unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip took place under Sharon's government. Granted that the current Israeli leadership is not up for making the decisions required, but making it into a blanket argument with regard to Israeli intransigence is off mark. Rather, more a prolonged leadership crisis issue.

And as a usual reminder, takes two to tango - not much willingness or ability to deliver evident on the Palestinian side.

Hard to tell what "Israel's political implosion" means, but not too hard to guess that its outcome would not be peaceful.

Why need the Palestinians make any concessions? They are the ones invaded, occupied and who have had their land stolen. They are still the majority in historic Palestine (strange isn't it...after all the ethnic cleansing and Jewish immigraton, and not even counting the Palestinian diaspora caused by the state of Israel), despite Lieberman's efforts to jerrymander the borders. Just like every other foreign colonialists Zionist Israel is destined ultimately to be assimilated with its neighbors.

Edited May 22, 2016 by dexterm

[JingerBen]

I'd ask for a refund on your book purchase.

Israel has never defined its borders. They somehow keep expanding.

Only for those overlooking the handing back of the Sinai Peninsula as part of the peace agreement with Egypt. And Israel's unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip.

As for borders not being defined - again, a two way street.

Complete chicanery. Arafat defined Israel's acceptable borders as the 67 lines....a huge concession already on what Zionists stole since 1947. It is Israel who disputes this by grabbing more land in the West Bank to build their Jewish only colonies.

Chicanery indeed.

What passes for Israeli foreign policy is based on deception.

Another proof of that is coming up soon with the way they will deal with the French peace initiative.

No ground will be given - you can bet the kibbutz on it.

[dexterm]

Avigdor Lieberman's pipedreams of ethnic cleansing are futile. Israel is on a collision course with acceptable global political norms. They cannot continue repressing in the most atrocious ways the non Jewish majority of the population in historic Palestine, the area Israel now completely controls, with impugnity. It is already de facto apartheid.

There will be no more large scale aliyahs while such extreme right wing policies are in force. Why would American Jewry and others from elsewhere migrate to Israel when they are doing very nicely practising their faith and living secure prosperous peaceful fully integrated lives in the USA and other countries. Thus Israeli Jews will inevitably become an embarrassing minority ruling regime, just like other colonial enterprises doomed to failure, when the world finally ostracizes them, if the Israeli electorate doesn't come to its senses sooner.

It is not BDS nor probably EU sanctions, but it is liberal democratically minded young American Jewry who will eventually see through the monster that their forebears have created. And good riddance to xenophobic Lieberman, Netanyahu, and the whole racist supremacist Zionist regime.

Care to elaborate on Lieberman's "pipedreamss of ethnic cleansing"? Lieberman's views are disturbing, even despicable to some, but not quite what you allude to. If anything, he is one of the few Israeli politicians addressing the demographic issues directly, even if his solutions are questionable.

As for your idyllic painting of the Jews assured future in other countries, there are enough historical precedents to take a more cautious view.

Lieberman's proposals are based on complete racist sleight of hand and a further land grab.

Will all those of you who are non Jews please go and belong to another country, so that we Jews can retain our racist/religionist majority. And if you dont like it, then swear an oath of allegiance to the racist supremacist Jewish State of Israel thus making yourselves instant second class citizens.

And all contrary of course to Israel's declaration of independence:

[The State of Israel] "will foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; it will be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; it will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture; it will safeguard the Holy Places of all religions; and it will be faithful to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations." ......ho ho ho

http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/foreignpolicy/peace/guide/pages/declaration%20of%20establishment%20of%20state%20of%20israel.aspx

Same same but different.

The Moldovan born Lieberman has no right to be in Palestine in the first place, let alone calling the shots as to who of the indigenous Palestinians have a right to live there or not.

Edited May 22, 2016 by dexterm

[Morch]

I'd ask for a refund on your book purchase.

Israel has never defined its borders. They somehow keep expanding.

Only for those overlooking the handing back of the Sinai Peninsula as part of the peace agreement with Egypt. And Israel's unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip.

As for borders not being defined - again, a two way street.

Complete chicanery. Arafat defined Israel's acceptable borders as the 67 lines....a huge concession already on what Zionists stole since 1947. It is Israel who disputes this by grabbing more land in the West Bank to build their Jewish only colonies.

You claim Israel expanded its borders. In fact, Israel controls less land than it did post 1967. I get it that a blanket statement sounds more impressive, but it does not hold water in this case. Relating specifically to the West Bank would have been less propaganda-like.

As for the 1967 lines, you conveniently fail to mention that Arafat expressed acceptance was some 20 years later on. The same lines were accepted as basis for negotiations by Israel, and thus served as the framework for the Oslo Accords. Had the Palestinians (and neighboring Arab countries) been more forthcoming with regard to peace, things could have turned out differently.

Acceptance of the 1967 lines was never a concession, but more an acknowledgment of reality. Israel (rather than "Zionists") did not steal anything. There were wars, territory was gained and lost, in some cases a settlement was reached through agreement, and in some, it did not. Once again, rewriting history will not change the facts - neither the Palestinians, nor the neighboring Arab countries were interested in peace for quite a long time. As said, takes two to tango.

The Oslo Accords, and following agreements, negotiations and understandings were all conducted using the 1967 lines as a baseline, not as final borders. This formulation was accepted by the Palestinians at the time. The above refers mainly to Fatah/Palestinian Authority positions, Hamas being a different story.

[Johpa]

I read recently that Hezbollah have indicated that they intend to make the ground run red with the blood of Israeli children. How can you defend such an attitude? How can you criticise putting these vermin down?

Further support of my position that both sides are in the wrong and a pox upon both their houses. But calling people vermin and then calling for "putting them down" is about as despicable as one can get. You can't get much lower on the continuum of humanity than that. You need to be put away somewhere out of reach of society. I believe there are openings at Guantanamo.

Just like every other foreign colonialists Zionist Israel is destined ultimately to be assimilated with its neighbors.

No, despite the often ill-conceived and uncritical support from the American Neo-Con community, Israel is not a foreign colony. That is a false analogy. It is not like the British in India or the French in Algeria. It is not destined to be assimilated in some organic sense by demographic change or by internal opposition. It may be annihilated, but that would entail some mutually assured destruction. One must be cautious unless that is an endgame that you are comfortable with and there are some eschatologies that are comfortable with that scenario. I would prefer finding alternatives.

[dexterm]

The western democracies you mention are rapidly losing any leverage they had with Israel. Lieberman or no Lieberman there are moves afoot which will culminate in peace between Israel and her Arab neighbors, I guess western leftists will then miraculously start taking an interest in their human rights records.

http://m.jpost.com/Israel-News/Politics-And-Diplomacy/Arab-governments-to-Netanyahu-Lets-talk-about-the-Saudi-peace-initiative-454559

You mean the corrupt autocratic aristocratic and military Arab dictatorships that are Zionism's natural bedfellows. Well, they are destined to the trashcan of history eventually too.

Somehow, the very same "corrupt autocratic aristocratic and military Arab dictatorships" did not pose much of an issue on all the many occasions in which you criticized Israel for not accepting the Arab Peace Initiative.

As it was pointed on almost each of these references, some of the relevant parties are no longer relevant. Now it seems even those still around and halfway willing are "destined to the trashcan of history".

Got to love the acrobatics.

I have never defended those corrupt regimes. My primary concern is with a just peace deal for the Palestinians. If Israel concomitantly signs up with the "corrupt autocratic aristocratic and military Arab dictatorships...friends of Israel" to enable this, thus facilitating interim lucrative trade deals with the aforementioned , all well and good for now. The citizens of these countries will ultimately assign their Emirs, Kings, and Military Dictators to the trash can of history where they belong.

Edited May 22, 2016 by dexterm

[dexterm]

I'd ask for a refund on your book purchase.

Israel has never defined its borders. They somehow keep expanding.

Only for those overlooking the handing back of the Sinai Peninsula as part of the peace agreement with Egypt. And Israel's unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip.

As for borders not being defined - again, a two way street.

Complete chicanery. Arafat defined Israel's acceptable borders as the 67 lines....a huge concession already on what Zionists stole since 1947. It is Israel who disputes this by grabbing more land in the West Bank to build their Jewish only colonies.

You claim Israel expanded its borders. In fact, Israel controls less land than it did post 1967. I get it that a blanket statement sounds more impressive, but it does not hold water in this case. Relating specifically to the West Bank would have been less propaganda-like.

As for the 1967 lines, you conveniently fail to mention that Arafat expressed acceptance was some 20 years later on. The same lines were accepted as basis for negotiations by Israel, and thus served as the framework for the Oslo Accords. Had the Palestinians (and neighboring Arab countries) been more forthcoming with regard to peace, things could have turned out differently.

Acceptance of the 1967 lines was never a concession, but more an acknowledgment of reality. Israel (rather than "Zionists") did not steal anything. There were wars, territory was gained and lost, in some cases a settlement was reached through agreement, and in some, it did not. Once again, rewriting history will not change the facts - neither the Palestinians, nor the neighboring Arab countries were interested in peace for quite a long time. As said, takes two to tango.

The Oslo Accords, and following agreements, negotiations and understandings were all conducted using the 1967 lines as a baseline, not as final borders. This formulation was accepted by the Palestinians at the time. The above refers mainly to Fatah/Palestinian Authority positions, Hamas being a different story.

Complete hogwash. You are being disingenuous. As you well know, Israel controls all the land of pre partition Palestine including Gaza from Lebanon to Sinai, from the Mediterranean to The Jordan River and more besides if you include Golan.

>>Acceptance of the 1967 lines was never a concession, but more an acknowledgment of reality

...Yes, Israel is very cunning at turning concessions into reality of facts on the ground..hence the expansion of colonies in the West Bank.

At the 2000 Camp David summit, Clinton asked Arafat Well where is your map? He laid out the 1967 ceasefire lines...that it is a huge concession for peace. He could have said the 47 Partition lines. I hope future Palestinian negotiators will do so, because that is just a fraction of the land that Zionist colonialists have stolen.

Edited May 22, 2016 by dexterm

[dexterm]

I read recently that Hezbollah have indicated that they intend to make the ground run red with the blood of Israeli children. How can you defend such an attitude? How can you criticise putting these vermin down?

Further support of my position that both sides are in the wrong and a pox upon both their houses. But calling people vermin and then calling for "putting them down" is about as despicable as one can get. You can't get much lower on the continuum of humanity than that. You need to be put away somewhere out of reach of society. I believe there are openings at Guantanamo.

Just like every other foreign colonialists Zionist Israel is destined ultimately to be assimilated with its neighbors.

No, despite the often ill-conceived and uncritical support from the American Neo-Con community, Israel is not a foreign colony. That is a false analogy. It is not like the British in India or the French in Algeria. It is not destined to be assimilated in some organic sense by demographic change or by internal opposition. It may be annihilated, but that would entail some mutually assured destruction. One must be cautious unless that is an endgame that you are comfortable with and there are some eschatologies that are comfortable with that scenario. I would prefer finding alternatives.

>> Israel is not a foreign colony.

Wrong.Zionism is a clear cut colonialist project.

Even the The Jewish Virtual Library claims that as far back as 1800 almost 100 years before the founding of Zionism in 1897 and the waves of Jewish immigration that Zionism encouraged, Jews formed a mere 8.7% (24,000) and Palestinians 91.3% (275,000) of the population.

Even after the first waves of Jewish migrations 1890 - 1922, the Jewish population of Palestine was only 11% when the first census was taken, and they owned a mere 3% of the land

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/demograhics.html

Add to that ...36 of the 37 signatories of Israel's Declaration of Independence were born outside Palestine mainly in Eastern Europe.

And that despite all the ethnic cleansings of Palestinians and all the Jewish immigration, that Palestinians are still today the majority.

Go figure who the invaders and colonialists are!

That popular work of fiction, the Bible, is not a real estate title deed.

Of course Israeli Jews and non Jews will ultimately be assimilated in Palestine, despite Lieberman's best aspirations. They all live there. Just as white and black S Africans now live together.

Edited May 22, 2016 by dexterm

[Litlos]

Just Bibi playing politics and deals I think. A week ago he "maybe" had the numbers to get the Leviathan gas deal through the hoops, shuffles the cabinet on the 21st and the Leviathan deal approval is announced on the 22nd. Could be a coincidence, but as someone who has been following this project for a while, I think not.

The details of the Leviathan deal are on finance.yahoo.com My work computer decided not to let me post links.

Cheers

[Johpa]

Wrong. Zionism is a clear cut colonialist project.

I am not wrong. But we are in disagreement.

[hugh2121]

I read recently that Hezbollah have indicated that they intend to make the ground run red with the blood of Israeli children. How can you defend such an attitude? How can you criticise putting these vermin down?

Further support of my position that both sides are in the wrong and a pox upon both their houses. But calling people vermin and then calling for "putting them down" is about as despicable as one can get. You can't get much lower on the continuum of humanity than that. You need to be put away somewhere out of reach of society. I believe there are openings at Guantanamo.

Just like every other foreign colonialists Zionist Israel is destined ultimately to be assimilated with its neighbors.

No, despite the often ill-conceived and uncritical support from the American Neo-Con community, Israel is not a foreign colony. That is a false analogy. It is not like the British in India or the French in Algeria. It is not destined to be assimilated in some organic sense by demographic change or by internal opposition. It may be annihilated, but that would entail some mutually assured destruction. One must be cautious unless that is an endgame that you are comfortable with and there are some eschatologies that are comfortable with that scenario. I would prefer finding alternatives.

they intend to make the ground run red with the blood of Israeli children

You have no criticism of this? "they intend to make the ground run red with the blood of Israeli children". You actually dare to criticise my post?

[hugh2121]

Dexterm

" the land that Zionist colonialists have stolen."???? Stolen from whom?

Palestine does not exist. Palestine never has existed.

Israel became a nation in 1312 BCE.

Arabs from neighbouring countries have infiltrated Israel and their home countries will not let them go back, preferring instead to use these now stateless arabs to stir up hatred and annihilate all Jews.

[dexterm]

I read recently that Hezbollah have indicated that they intend to make the ground run red with the blood of Israeli children. How can you defend such an attitude? How can you criticise putting these vermin down?

Further support of my position that both sides are in the wrong and a pox upon both their houses. But calling people vermin and then calling for "putting them down" is about as despicable as one can get. You can't get much lower on the continuum of humanity than that. You need to be put away somewhere out of reach of society. I believe there are openings at Guantanamo.

Just like every other foreign colonialists Zionist Israel is destined ultimately to be assimilated with its neighbors.

No, despite the often ill-conceived and uncritical support from the American Neo-Con community, Israel is not a foreign colony. That is a false analogy. It is not like the British in India or the French in Algeria. It is not destined to be assimilated in some organic sense by demographic change or by internal opposition. It may be annihilated, but that would entail some mutually assured destruction. One must be cautious unless that is an endgame that you are comfortable with and there are some eschatologies that are comfortable with that scenario. I would prefer finding alternatives.

they intend to make the ground run red with the blood of Israeli children

You have no criticism of this? "they intend to make the ground run red with the blood of Israeli children". You actually dare to criticise my post?

Got a feeling that is just Hezbollah hot air and rhetoric. Whereas Israel has already achieved that objective.

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

and Gaza in 2014 where over 560 children (some just playing soccer on a beach) were murdered by the IDF.

I suggest you Google Images: Palestinian children killed

I believe we may be drifting off topic unless you feel that Lieberman has more murder in mind.

Edited May 23, 2016 by dexterm

[dexterm]

Dexterm

" the land that Zionist colonialists have stolen."???? Stolen from whom?

Palestine does not exist. Palestine never has existed.

Israel became a nation in 1312 BCE.

Arabs from neighbouring countries have infiltrated Israel and their home countries will not let them go back, preferring instead to use these now stateless arabs to stir up hatred and annihilate all Jews.

Stolen from the resident population in Palestine when European Zionists started to migrate there in the 1890s with the intention of establishing a Jewsh state by dispossessing the resident population, which they have succeeded in doing. And Lieberman is still doing the same.

I notice no reponse to the Jewish Virtual Library population figures undeniably showing that Jews were a clear minority in Palestine and still are.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/demograhics.html

You clearly prefer the usual Zionist mythology and pseudo history.

[thaibeachlovers]

Dexterm

" the land that Zionist colonialists have stolen."???? Stolen from whom?

Palestine does not exist. Palestine never has existed.

Israel became a nation in 1312 BCE.

Arabs from neighbouring countries have infiltrated Israel and their home countries will not let them go back, preferring instead to use these now stateless arabs to stir up hatred and annihilate all Jews.

Israel became a nation in 1312 BCE.

That has to be the most pointless reason for the existence of Israel.

If that is so, all non native American settlers should go back "home", English people of Norman descent go back to France etc etc.

[bobbin]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/22/opinion/sunday/israels-army-goes-to-war-with-its-politicians.html

So whose views should prevail? Those who operate at the coal-face or an intransigent, belligerent politician and his even more belligerent "allies"?

Edited May 23, 2016 by bobbin

[dexterm]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/22/opinion/sunday/israels-army-goes-to-war-with-its-politicians.html

So whose views should prevail? Those who operate at the coal-face or an intransigent, belligerent politician and his even more belligerent "allies"?

Yes, very interesting article.

"What would the army and intelligence chiefs do if the new minister [Lieberman] issued instructions not to prosecute people who committed crimes like Elor Azariah’s in Hebron? Or if Mr. Lieberman demands, as he has done in the past, that Israel assassinate Hamas leaders if they do not return the remains of fallen Israeli soldiers, or “conquer Gaza” or “bomb the Aswan Dam,” as he has said Israel would do if it ever faced war with Egypt? Will they execute his orders, or refuse because they can grasp the dimensions of the catastrophe that such actions would bring about, and suffer the personal consequences?"

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/22/opinion/sunday/israels-army-goes-to-war-with-its-politicians.html

[Scott]

I strongly suggest you re-read the OP and stop with the troll posts. Suspensions will be given if it continues.