What a ridiculous, offensive and thoroughly demented thesis this is (IMHO). There are a thousand holes in the incoherent argument presented above, but a few are particularly striking with regard to the situation on the ground in Palestine...
There is little one can say to someone who thinks offering 97% of an area that has already been reduced by 85% and therefore little more than a moth eaten 12% of the original occupied land, is a good deal.
Similarly, there is not much one can say to someone who thinks the main complaint of people who survived the most brutal and intense air attack of the century was the noise of the aircraft flying overhead.
The implication that everyone who rightly criticizes the most reactionary, racist and religiously bigoted government in the Middle East is antisemitic and wants Jews dead is extremely offensive, but on the other hand I think this is one of the tactics of hasbara. I don't know for sure, so perhaps someone can fill us in?
You're not rebutting his points at all, just bringing up red herrings. I guess you are conceding he's right.
I just say again, wow. If you really believe that the Palestinian leadership and their followers want to exterminate all Jews, you will never have peace. I sincerely hope that the Palestinians have more respect for you than you have for them.
Denying an unpleasant truth won't make it go away. Just listen to their words--again and again they have called for the death of the Jews.
You are, in fact, proving my point in this thread.
I'm doing no such thing. I'm saying that while you may feel you have the answers to my genuine questions about the situation on the ground, until I have seen things with my own eyes, I'll hold off from judging.
As I predicted, you presented facts to challenge or put a spin on the stories I had read about what's wrong with the wall. But I wasn't expecting you to claim me as a supporter for your point of view. I guess that's what's called chutzpah.
I don't disagree. It's not necessarily a good deal (although at this point it may be worth a shot as little else has seemed to work). But I don't think these discusses are aided by posters posting misinformation. The fact is that Palestinian leadership has suggested that the 1967 borders are just fine with them. Whether or not Israel likes the conditions that come with this are another discussion, IMHO.
When have they made this suggestion????
Reality check: They have offered the 67 borders in exchange for a *TEMPORARY* truce. This is consistent with the Islamic ideology of making a temporary peace with an enemy that you can't conquer *NOW*.
I don't get it: do you want more dead muslims? Less?
Or what about jews? I presume you want more of them alive... but perhaps more dead to even things out a little?
I really don't follow. Your thread smacks of outright bigotry. *We* don't talk about muslims killing each other... should we? Would that make you happy?
I don't get it. It seems pointless at best, and dangerously inflammatory at worst. You get a big
Any time Israel kills a Muslim the left jumps on it--yet they don't give a hoot when others kill Muslims.
That says that it's not dead Muslims that are the issue, but they are merely a means to tar Israel.
The behavior on this thread goes a long way towards supporting his position.
I'll just say that I think this thread hasn't exactly elevated the level of discourse regarding Israel/Palestine here on OMNI/PR.
I expect more of Dov.
Dov? He simply pointed out an unpleasant situation. I don't fully agree with him because I think a lot of what he's pointing to is stupidity rather than malice but the appearance is very similar. It's the responses that have been unreasonable.
.....
Let's face it: there is nothing the Palestinians can say that is a credible signal in this situation.
That's a sad position to take as it assumes all responsibility on the other side. There are multiple ACTIONS that could have been taken over the last few years that would have made a world of difference. A good starting point would be for Hamas and the PA to get their shyte together as opposed to having to negotiate two completely different positions vis a vie Israel, which makes an already complex situation almost impossible to resolve.
__________________
Don't argue with an idiot - people watching may not be able to tell the difference.
Denying an unpleasant truth won't make it go away. Just listen to their words--again and again they have called for the death of the Jews.
You are wrong. Some extremists within the Palestinian leadership have called for the death of Jews. Some extremists in the US Congress have called for the death of Muslims. But once again, the "us" versus "them" attitude is a contributing factor in the lack of peace.
Programs: UA 1K, IC RA, Marriott Silver, SPG Gold, ¤
Posts: 26,981
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel
How about seeing the fact that your position was shot down rather than trying to blame me about it?
What position was shot down? The Palestinians have repeatedly said they'd accept 1967 borders. This invalidates Dov's claim. You just don't like the deal that the Palestinians want in exchange for the border agreement.
1) I think this is probably at least a three way tie between Israel, Iran and Saudi Arabia. Though to be fair Israel is probably more tolerant than the KSA and probably a tad more tolerant than Iran depending on the particular issue. However all three governments are capable of extremely thuggish behavior. It's just whether or not it's your flavor of religion whether you support their right to be thuggish or not. Not really sure where Syria fits in as they're probably more secular than the other three, though a more despotic regime as well. Kuwaitis manage to be a bit despotic AND snotty as all hell, and most of the other Gulf states just pay off their loonies to buy another day or two of peace and interest on their money.
2) I have no idea what "hasbara" is.
I have no hatred of Israel in my heart at all, but no one involved is really even interested in peace. They all want some sort of Godly victory instead. If all Israelis and all Palestinians were all to suddenly become atheists this would all be over and done with in a matter of hours with a lasting peace and mostly open borders. It's not about "peace", it's about both sides thinking they have some pre-destined "right" to the land and we're not likely to ever see peace in the region as long as that emotional stalemate exists. /shrug
Regards,
-Bouncer-
Just a general point about the Middle East.... KSA (thought they could use religion as a political tool and not have it come back to bite them later) and Yemen (really quite poor) are nut job central. The others are all liberal to varying degrees and the natives have lots of cash for not doing a lot (not conducive to being nut jobs, especially considering many of them have degrees from Manchester and Liverpool).
In terms of peace.... The 1967 borders aren't going to happen. Putting my armchair tactician's hat on.... Israel would just be too small to defend itself with any degree of certainty (I believe we're talking a country that could conceivably be over run in a couple of hours given the old borders).
The more I think about it, had the various protagonists played nice with each other early on.... Israel would probably have bought land instead of conveniently being given the pretext to take it (which it did).
So, in that respect I'm quite pessimistic. Without a major compromise from Israel's neighbours, Israel's least risk approach to national survival, without resorting to nukes, is the status-quo. In the meantime, people all over the world are backed in a corner and feel a call to arms because their "Muslim brothers" were idiots 40 odd years ago (and that in itself is a huge problem that isn't going away any time soon).
Programs: UA 1K, IC RA, Marriott Silver, SPG Gold, ¤
Posts: 26,981
Quote:
Originally Posted by runningshoes
That's a sad position to take as it assumes all responsibility on the other side.
How so? You don't truly believe that Israel will accept anything that Hamas, for instance, promises, right?
Sure it is a sad position, but it has nothing to do with responsibility. It has everything to do with credibility. Hamas has very little, according to Israel.
Programs: UA 1K, IC RA, Marriott Silver, SPG Gold, ¤
Posts: 26,981
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel
Dov? He simply pointed out an unpleasant situation. I don't fully agree with him because I think a lot of what he's pointing to is stupidity rather than malice but the appearance is very similar. It's the responses that have been unreasonable.
No. The thread title itself is extremely distasteful.
Reality check: They have offered the 67 borders in exchange for a *TEMPORARY* truce. This is consistent with the Islamic ideology of making a temporary peace with an enemy that you can't conquer *NOW*.
First of all, I have yet to hear anyone on this board suggest that any actions on the part of Israel are consistent with Jewish or Israeli ideology. Your statement is borderline racist, as it attributes a way of thinking to an entire race, versus individuals.
Secondly, they offered a temporary truce in exchange for the 67 borders. It seems to me that this is a starting point for discussions. Instead of simply rejecting it outright, it would be helpful to actually listen and discuss.
The Palestinians have repeatedly said they'd accept 1967 borders. This invalidates Dov's claim. You just don't like the deal that the Palestinians want in exchange for the border agreement.
