Israel/Palestine

[CheerfulYank]

Um...not to be a stupid American who knows nothing about global concerns, but... I have pregnancy brain, does anyone want to give me a basic outline of what's happening?

[NicholasTeakozy]

This old article is worth reading.

This one gives background to the current shitstorm.

[CheerfulYank]

Thanks, Nick.

It's just so terrible. :(

[NicholasTeakozy]

Nae bother CY. I think old Fisky can be trusted, he left The Times on principle. He had an article spiked in 1982 and left to write for the Indy. Also, he lives in Beirut, and has done for about 35 years.

[CheerfulYank]

It's just one of those things that I've heard about on and off forever and never had a clear idea of what exactly was going on.

God, how awful though. Just to never feel safe. :(

[somebloke123]

I think it only fair to point out that Fisk, whether you agree or not, comes at it from a very pro-Palestinian and anti-Israeli perspective.

[somebloke123]

I think it only fair to point out that Fisk, whether you agree or not, comes at it from a very pro-Palestinian and anti-Israeli perspective.

[somebloke123]

Sorry for the double post (well - triple now).

[FabulousFreaks]

It needed pointing out somebloke, how can a person claim to understand such a complex problem after reading one article written by someone with a biased viewpoint. Makes me . You know some of us are directly involved in the conflict and the lack of sensitivity and understanding is staggering. There are many world issues of which I know nothing but I would never presume to hear one report and then claim to know. People just do not understand just how biased media reports are.

[NicholasTeakozy]

I have been reading articles by Robert Fisk for about 20 years. He is equally at home criticising Palestinians as he is Israelis. Sure, in the piece he wrote the other day he pushes blame at Israel for their brutality. Rightly so. Their shooting of a teenager seems to have started the current problem. He also says Hamas are firing missiles indiscriminately at Israel.

The article that caused him to leave The Times was about the shooting down of an Iranian airliner.

[NicholasTeakozy]

It's Palestinians who have the right to defend themselves.

[breadandbutterfly]

Vast oversimplification of the isssues.

Clearly, if multiple rocket attacks were raining down on NicholasTeakozy's home area, s/he would turn the other cheek nicely. Strangely, most people would retaliate to try to prevent these attacks. I know I would. If rockets were raining down on me daily from France, I would be on at my govt to do something, anything to stop it and I'm guessing that a nicer life, more help for those launching rockets at me in France, wouldn't be top of my list.

Expecting the Israeli's to be saints is stupid and unrealistic. They value their children's lives as much as you do and have a right to protect them. See:

blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100190047/would-britain-react-like-israel-has-to-a-few-rockets-yes-we-would-and-we-have-before/

for another view.

[NicholasTeakozy]

Fisky interviews an Israeli Jewish writer.

[Hummingbirds]

breadandbutterfly -- This article creates a very useful analogy of the conflict in terms of Mexicans and Americans:

Washington Times article

[breadandbutterfly]

Nicholas - are you Fisk? You seem to view him as the only writer on the Israel-Palestine situation.

In fact, he is notoriously one-sided. Fine, if you admit it and agree with him. But you can hardly present his views as some sort of accepted middle-ground - he is pretty extreme.

[breadandbutterfly]

Hummingbirds, some intetesting points, but again a vast over-simplification. Crucially, that in your analogy, the existence of America is never for one second threatended - just the lifestyle of one tiny corner of it. This is conveniently overlooked in your scenario. The reality is that Israel and Israelis are fighting for their own survival, surrounded by agggressive enemies who have made no secret of their desire to wipe out the Israeli state in entirety. Whilst I am sure that many on both sides do desire peace, it is not just naive but simply wrong to suggest that Hamas want a peaceful two-state solution - they don't. So Israel has no choice but to defend its borders. As we would do. As America would do if it's very survival was threatened by Mexico (highly unlikely). As any country would do if its survival was threatened.

That's the reality. not nice cuddly Palestinian children v big bad Israelis. Wish it was that simple. Sorry.

[Hummingbirds]

'So Israel has no choice but to defend its borders.'
-- Since when was Operation Cast Lead about borders? It was about pulverising the tiny strip of land known as Gaza.

What do you have to say about the Dahiya doctrine, breadandbutterfly? Namely the intentional smashing of the civilian infrastructure and the concomitant 'collateral damage' of 'cuddly Palestinian children'.

And are you really arguing that the handful of puny missiles Hamas has is capable of wiping out a nuclear power?

[breadandbutterfly]

It's about security. Why should Israel be expected to tolerate rocket attacks well within pre-1967 borders? Would you tolerate it, if rockets were coming down daily near you? Really?

I wouldn't. I would want the sources of those rockets destroyed. Maybe, just maybe, those firing the rockets into Israel - aimed indicrimately at any targets, not just military ones - should avoid firing rockets from civilian areas if they really want to protect their own citizens? Can Hamas really be unaware that firing rockets from civilian areas is dangerous and might prompt retaliation?

I feel for the innocent victims on both sides. But the solution needs a holding of fire on both sides - Israel cannot be expected to ignore the increase on attacks within its own territory.

[breadandbutterfly]

I suspect arguing over 'who started it'is a bit chicken and egg and will get no-one anywhere. But as to who will resolve it - it takes two.

[NicholasTeakozy]

Here's what Gilad Sharon, son of Ariel Sharon, said about Gaza in the Jerusalem Post:-

"We need to flatten entire neighbourhoods in Gaza. Flatten all of Gaza. The Americans didn't stop with Hiroshima; the Japanese weren't surrendering quickly enough so they hit Nagasaki too"

No, in answer to your question, I am not Robert Fisk. CY knows who I am. I am, though, flattered that you mistake my ramblings for the artist that is Fisky.

He may be biased in favour of the Palestinians, but he displays no hatred of Israelis, rather he hates the treatment of Palestine by successive governments since 1968. He counts Jews, Moslems and Christians amongst his friends. Indeed, he'd be daft if he didn't as he has lived in Beirut since 1976.

[Saski]

breadandbutterfly, maybe Israel should withdraw from it's illegal settlements they're seeking peace.

[Saski]

sorry, if they're seeking peace.

[StripyShoes]

I have tried reading the above linked articles, but all assume some background knowledge. Can I go one step further, admit complete ignorance, and ask for dot points please? As in:
Israel did this
So Palestine did this
Then this happened.

thanks!

[OddBoots]

I've tried to work it out that way StripyShoes but found it far too complex for that, far far too complex.

[donnie]

I fully expect Mossad to be implicated in the suspecter murder of Arafat. Although Israel will deny it, of course.

[Brodicea]

It is massively complex , and I certainly don't pretend to understand it all.

But the outline information I have ( I am not on one side or the other ) mainly from movies and documentaries:

British Empire 'owned' or rather ruled over the area of Palestine.
Zionists and other denominations of jews had been in the area for some time, and Britain agreed to give them a portion of the area of Palestine. People were hugely anti-semitic, and they wanted the security of having their own space.
Of course, historically the Jewish people did come from this part of the world but were expelled: like Biblical times.
BUT the land was given without the permission of the people living there and around it: agreements were drawn and re-drawn.
WW2 happened, the holocaust etc, and of course the Jewish people more than ever wanted their own state and many fled to Israel.
So the agreement with Britain was on shaky ground. Britain buggered off and left them to it: or rather the UN took responsibility for refereeing.
Then peoples homes were demolished, people were killed on both sides, everyone staking claim to the same bits of land.
LOTS of shit went down.
The in the 70s the Munich massacre (this is where my movie knowledge comes from: see 'Munich') confirmed an 'eye for an eye' approach by Israel, seeing as the international community carried on with their Olympics despite the massacre of the Israeli team: pah to them, we will get revenge, we won't take it lying down etc.
Lots more shit went down, and Israel helped with the massacre of people in the Lebanese war (See the film 'Waltz with Bashir' - VERY good on Israeli guilt and echoes of the holocaust).
Lots and lots more shit: all in a terrible tangle.



SORRY if this offends: I am very very ignorant of all of this, but seem to be confronted by people on all sides taking a black and white view. MY only view is that this is a real shitter and I'm just not sure how it will be solved.

I know this subject is like incendiary, in more ways than one.