Are you taking into account the refugees? In Israel+Bank+Gaza Jews are a majority. Anyway, it is not as if human rights are a matter of percentages.
Yeah, I was taking account the refugees since they’re caught in the middle of the conflict.
If Israel were simply defensive in its approach to the Palestinian conflict and responding to the unjustified and continuous assault they face daily, then the situation would be different. However, you overlook how things like settlement activity is in itself an ongoing form of assault that the Israelis refuse to cease doing.
In a final agreement, everybody pretty much knows that the bits of the West Bank with a large Jewish population will be swapped for the bits of Israel proper with large Arab populations. The settlement activity is only a big deal because the Palestinians insist on making it a big deal. In fact, it’s only when Obama took power and decided that they were a precondition for talks that the Palestinians suddenly also decided they were a precondition for talks.
And do you honestly think if Israel simply “responded to the assault they face every day” that the international outrage would be any less? It doesn’t seem to matter what Israel does or why: anything they do that results in a dead Palestinian, for any reason, whether intentional or not, is going to result in outrage. That’s the good old double standard at work.
Also, its not because Israeli Arabs have a higher standard of living relative to those of Palestinians in Gaza, that they are not discriminated against heavily within Israeli society.
I never claimed they weren’t. What I said is that discrimination is not apartheid. Also, try this for an intellectual exercise: Take a random Arab and plop him in the middle of Tel Aviv. Now take a random Jew and plop him in the middle of Ramallah. Who is going to have more human rights? Who do you think the population, of any ethnicity, would rather have in power (strictly on those terms)?
If you want to compare the god given right to white power to Israel, its easy to do because many people in Israel see it as their Holy Land :P. They are a minority of Jews suppressing a majority of Arabs, like the white Afrikaaners were suppressing a majority of black Africans.
The Arabs also see it as their holy land, so the comparison doesn’t work. And in any case the cause of the various security measures has nothing to do with the fact that Israel is the Jewish holy land, and everything to do with the fact that without those security measures, many more Jews would be killed. The black Africans weren’t going around saying that the white Africans all needed to be wiped off the map, and they certainly weren’t doing that while having access to suicide bombs and rockets.
Also, for the record, racism is alive and well in Canada. Its not just a Quebec problem, though the Quebeckers are the most vocally racist. Its just that racism manifests itself differently from the US for historical and socio-economic reasons. Because of these differences, many Canadians hypocritically claim to be above racism, but its just a lot of bullshit. They simply aren’t challenged on the racism of their views and behavior.
That’s for sure. The systematic discrimination I mentioned is in Ontario, not Quebec.
Israel is not going to go away, but Israel is not innoncent. The status quo is not viable and will only continue to degenerate. The Israeli-Palestininan conflict is a blight which helps no one, except as Cid accurately pointed out and which many Arabs I know will also claim, help prop up dictators everywhere by creating a lengthy distraction.
I agree with all of these statements. Israel is not innocent - but then, I’d like to see an example of any country a similar situation who would be more innocent. The solution to the conflict will inevitably lie in slowly building trust - not elections, not land swaps, not handshakes and deals, but the gradual acceptance of each side of the legitimate issues of the other.
I don’t disagree about your claims about what would happen to a Jew in Ramallah (or more precisely, a zionist Jews) , but its not because the other side does it that its right to reciprocate. Its not a matter of relative morality. Its wrong no matter what. It is that simple. Regarding black Africans, I refer you to the song “Shoot the Boer”.
Regarding the settlements: why bother with the settlements to begin with then? Why not simply put them within uncontested land within the 1967 borders? It only serves to diminish Israel’s credibility to inflame the situation.
I wasn’t trying to say that it’s okay because the Arabs were doing it. My point is that Jews feel a need to protect their land and their control over it precisely because giving it - at least the important bits - to the Arabs is a recipe for disaster. Again, this doesn’t give the Jews an excuse to discriminate - on the other hand, it’s not unreasonable to be a bit annoyed at an ethnic group whose leaders (still popular leaders) have sworn to kill you.
Regarding black Africans, I refer you to the song “Shoot the Boer”.
One song =/= a charter written by the ruling party to kill every last Jew and overthrow their country so none are left, and a concentrated, often successful campaign to bring it to fruition via suicide bombings and rocket attacks.
The point of the settlements is because Jews feel that those parts of the land are historically important to them. This isn’t Canada where every square foot of land is exactly like every other square foot.
Then you would have to admit that West Jerusalem (best example) is important to the Palestinians and stop forcing them out. Having them recognize what’s important to you means you recognizing what’s important to them. It goes both ways.
The liberation of South Africa was not a peaceful process.
Links to that video were distributed by the Israeli government, and it was produced by one of Isreal’s top daily papers.
Not helping guys.
Oh the poor country of Israel…just look at all the land they have lost in the last 50 years.
Again, this doesn’t give the Jews an excuse to discriminate - on the other hand, it’s not unreasonable to be a bit annoyed at an ethnic group whose leaders (still popular leaders) have sworn to kill you.
I won’t deny the Hamas charter says the Jews will be murdered. However, I should point out that it technically does not say THEY will murder the Jews…just that Allah will ensure their extermination. Perhaps it’s a difference that doesn’t seem to matter that much, but it’s worth noting. Also, the Hamas charter was written over 20 years ago, and change is always possible. Unfortunately, with the behavior of Israel towards the population of Gaza, they are only ensuring the further radicalization of the normal population. Let’s not forget that the constitution of the United States originally classified black people (aka slaves) as counting as only 3/5ths of a “normal person”…my point is that just because something is written in a constitution does not mean it will somehow be magically true forever. r
Then you would have to admit that West Jerusalem (best example) is important to the Palestinians and stop forcing them out. Having them recognize what’s important to you means you recognizing what’s important to them.
It’s also important to Jews, though - it’s where its holiest site, in fact, lies. The Temple on the Mount was the centre of Jewish religion for 800 years and the Western Wall is the most powerful religious symbol of Judaism. I agree that the Israelis need to pay more attention to the Palestinians but that doesn’t mean automatically giving up things they want either. That’s what negotiations are for.
Zepp: Your graph is so disingenuous I don’t know where to start. In 1945 there was no such thing as Palestine. There was no such thing as a Palestinian. The area on the map - and a huge area besides it - was owned by England, who then partitioned it into Arab and Jewish states. The Arab state was Jordan. The Jewish state was attacked. Modern-day Israel is on only a fraction of the Mandate that was supposed to be given to Israel. When Israel captured more land, both in 1945 and in 1967, it was as part of a war which was instigated by Arab countries, who lost. The Israelis captured the land from Egypt and Jordan, who had occupied it - not Palestine, which still didn’t exist.
I won’t deny the Hamas charter says the Jews will be murdered. However, I should point out that it technically does not say THEY will murder the Jews…just that Allah will ensure their extermination. Perhaps it’s a difference that doesn’t seem to matter that much, but it’s worth noting.
No… no, it really doesn’t. Why put in a charter something you don’t intend to work towards? I think you recognize how weak that hopeful argument is.
Of course it won’t have to be true forever if it’s in the constitution - but it’s true now. Certainly Hamas’s actual goals are still bang alongside their charter. And yes, it’s possible that Israel’s treatment of Gazans can lead to radicalization - but it can also lead to them getting fed up with their terrorist leaders. Most of the radicalization happened well before the Gaza blockade etc. The real question is which of the tactics will work, which is something I doubt either you or I could really say with accuracy.
And the Al Aqsa Mosque. You can’t have everything 
Yep, which is why Israeli authorities have ceded the mosque to the Arab Waqf (which bugs the heck out of a lot of Jews). If the entire East Jerusalem was under Arab control, history says the Western Wall wouldn’t still have an influx of Jewish supplicants.
Then if I understand correctly, since you made the claim that Palestinian land would be compensated for with the settlements, then sections of Jerusalem would have to be yielded to the Palestinians. However, the current policy is about walling off all of Jerusalem with Jewish “settlement” in Palestinian areas.
The black Africans weren’t going around saying that the white Africans all needed to be wiped off the map, and they certainly weren’t doing that while having access to suicide bombs and rockets.
Actually, the African National Congress - the political group that Nelson Mandela headed and that was pretty much responsible for ending apartheid - was also a paramilitary organization and engaged in intense terrorist acts and a guerilla war against the South African government. I’m not sure of the exact details, but the ANC definitely did use things like car bombs and other types of bombs against the South African military as well as government officials, and that extensive amounts of civilians were killed in the process. By the year 1983 these attacks caused the deaths of over 100,000 people, including an estimated 40,000 civilians]; considering that apartheid didn’t end until the early 90s, the ultimate death toll is probably significantly higher.
Here is an article from the BBC archive that describes one such attack.
At least 16 people have been killed and more than 130 people injured in a car bomb explosion in South Africa’s capital city, Pretoria.
The explosion happened outside the Nedbank Square building on Church Street at about 1630 hours - the height of the city’s rush hour
The outlawed anti-apartheid group the African National Congress has been blamed for the attack
The ANC is committed to overthrowing the minority white government.
Oliver Tambo, who is the organisation’s acting president while its senior figure, Nelson Mandela, is in prison, said the Nedbank Square building was a legitimate target, although he did not admit carrying out the attack.
…
General Magnus Malan, South African’s defence minister, described the explosion as a “cowardly, criminal deed in the Communist war being raged against South Africa”.
He said more than 40,000 civilians had died as a result of terrorism in the past five years in Africa and 83,000 armed men had died.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/may/20/newsid_4326000/4326975.stm
The current policy is complex and very easy to misunderstand; what’s a neighborhood that was historically Jewish but currently Arab, or vice versa? Or a neighborhood that’s predominantly Arab but has some Jews living in it, or vice versa? It’s easy to label the building as “settlement activity” but it’s nowhere near that simple.
Curtis: I guess I stand corrected. But there is still one significant difference: The ANC was created to end apartheid. Beforehand, the blacks were submissive, and the ANC’s terrorism was a result of decades of discrimination and segregation. In Israel, the hostility and violence was there from the beginning; the day after Israel was created, it was attacked by Arab armies.
The one thing that bugs me about the word “apartheid” is that people use it for completely different purposes: the security fence separating Israelis and Palestinians is “apartheid”, even though everyone agrees that the areas being separated are eventually going to be separate states (oh, and suicide bombings have completely disappeared since it went up). And pervasive discrimination against Arabs in Israel proper is also apartheid, even though none of that is really enshrined in law; Arabs are discriminated against the same way, say, Muslims would be in certain states, or blacks, just because people are jerks. That isn’t apartheid either.
lol hundreds of students jailed in the West Bank literally for only trying to better themselves and their society - this doesn’t even mention the barbaric Israeli settlers that throw rocks at little Palestinian children simply because they are trying to go to school, but hey - might as well kill those kids before they become terrorists right?
Dude, what the hell? Are you saying there are adult Israelis who deliberately throw rocks at little kids going to school? On a regular basis? Without being charged? Source please.
And the claim that “hundreds of students” are being incarcerated for nothing but “trying to better their society” isn’t even borne out by this giant article, which is obviously biased, being put out by a Ramallan university. It doesn’t say what kind of “society” is in question, and it doesn’t say what they were charged with. It doesn’t say how old they are. It also says “since November 2003” - i.e. over seven years.
Try getting at least a little bit of balance, won’t you?
Curtis: I guess I stand corrected. But there is still one significant difference: The ANC was created to end apartheid. Beforehand, the blacks were submissive, and the ANC’s terrorism was a result of decades of discrimination and segregation. In Israel, the hostility and violence was there from the beginning; the day after Israel was created, it was attacked by Arab armies.
Yeah, my correction doesn’t effect the debate, I just thought it was an important thing to say considering the number of people killed by the ANC.
The problem with the Israel’s blockade of Gaze is that it’s not just a military blockade on weapons, ammunition, and things which could be used to improvise weapons. Israel openly blocks spices, toys, and other harmless consumer goods.
It’s mass punishment. Israel thinks that, if they make everyone miserable enough, then Hamas will go away. This sort of thing never works.
A Frank Herbert quote sums it up for me, “Enemies make you stronger.” Every time Israel cracks down on militants hiding in civilian populations, they kill or capture only the stupidest and least serious among them, which leaves the best and brightest to share ideas and come up with better ways to fuck with Israel.
You don’t hunt deer by running through the woods and shooting everything that has antlers; you find a likely spot while doing everything to hide your scent, set bait, camouflage yourself, and wait for them to come to you. After a few days, they are so comfortable and complacent, you can get close and pick which one you want to eat for the next month.
If I were in charge, I’d make Gaza into a soft, comfortable place, so that, even if the Palestinians wanted to fight, they’d be too used to soft living (like the majority of fat-ass, McDonald’s-eating American men) to do so. Not to mention that many Palestinians would be too invested in their lives to want a war.
It’s all about giving the other guy a reason to do what you want. Pointing a gun at him only goes so far; eventually, everyone fights back.
An aside about my comment on American men: How exactly are all those fat proxy-republicans (conservative constitutionalist-libertarians… how is that even fucking possible?) going to fight the Darky Hordes (and their requisite fat white girlfriends) when they’re too fat and diabetic to fire those guns they have?
How do you get in a good firing position when your neckfat keeps blubbering all over the buttstock?
The problem is that Gaza is run by an organization dedicated to destroying Israel - so how do you make it a “soft, comfortable place”? Hamas steals all the money they want from the “humanitarian aid” coming in and uses it to build weapons and bunkers. The regular people won’t see it. And it’s not like Gazans have proven themselves very smart in keeping and making money. When Israel kicked all the Jews out of Gaza in 2005, they left perfectly serviceable greenhouses and farms - the pride of Israel, in fact - and within weeks they were stripped to the bone and are now hunks of rusted metal.
In any case, the international fallout from this has already caused Israel to rethink the blockade, and they’ve already started letting in more stuff. I doubt it’ll do much in terms of peace efforts, but let’s see how it goes.