Part 6: Israeli-Palestinian conflict

[AndHarry]

Sorry, lost the end of the thread there!

Thread 5

it seems they don't want to clarify that generalising (and inaccurate statement)

typical baiting by false accusation... Ignore.

Interesting speech by finklestein on israels 'mowing the lawn' in gaza.. Israeli speak fir flattening gaza;

m.youtube.com/watch?v=7cZSS8eP3l4

Watch his other ones too; they are brilliant.

Oh sorry, I didn't realise, do the anti-Israel posters not want Israel to be annihilated?
It's just that they seem so in favour of policies that would lead to Israel's annihilation.
Such as lifting the blockade so that the explicitly genocidal Hamas can receive weapons shipments from Iran.

Would anyone like to participate in a if-I-ruled-the-world exercise, and say how they would solve the Israeli-Arab conflict? The only limit to the exercise being that neither side can cease to exist in the new order.

No but then its not israel thats being wiped off the map is it?

" I didn't realise, do the anti-Israel posters not want Israel to be annihilated?"

So, are you talking about me? Or about someone else? Presumably you do have someone in mind, unless you have just made it up?

Sigh, PigletJohn, no it's not all about you.
It's about those in favour of policies that would lead to Israel's destruction and those who support those parties dedicated to Israel's destruction. So if you are in favour of letting Iran arm Hamas via naval shipments (as they were doing before the blockade put a stop to it), then yes I am referring to you. Decide yourself if that applies.

Sargeant, I think what you're missing is that Hamas arent just dedicated to 'wiping Israel off the map' for the sake of. They formed in response to the injustice inflicted on the Palestinians over decades. They have presumably (i dont profess to know) decided that - in the same way that earlier generations of israelis did - there's no alternative to violence in a desperate attempt to achieve their goals.

We therefore need to differentiate between the true goal, ie the pursuance of justice for the displaced/oppressed/dispossessed palestinians, and the means through which they think this may be achieved (ie 'removing' the oppressor/occupier).

The people you accuse of 'ignoring' the Hamas 'threat' are just trying to get to the root of the issue rather than perpetuating the cycle of violence.

seargent you said that people on this thread expressly wanted to see israel anihilated. surely you must have meant at least one person in particular - in fact i think you said it was the view of the whole pro palestinian rights voice on this thread.

yet you name no one? so you just made it up.

"all about you"

Interesting addition of the word "all."

I am one of the people who is critical of the actions of the State of Israel.

He won't say if he has seen anyone say "Israel should be annihilated." I don't recall seeing it. Perhaps it is what he thinks he saw.

Yes but victim blaming is all to common with the 'anti pslestinians'...how else will they justify israels war crimes..?

Anyone referring to the 'threats' to Israel's existence should - imo - before taking umbrage at such talk, just take a long hard look at the real-life actions (cyclically repeated with ever increasing brutality) of the state of israel - those physical/psychological assaults (bombing, shelling, massacring, generally destroying, humiliating, herding and abusing, not to even mention playing football with an infant, ffs!!!) - which are perpetrated on a daily/weekly/monthly/yearly basis, which clearly function to destroy the spirit/hopes/dreams, psyche, mental/physical health, physical environment, personal/material possessions, and generally lay waste to the entire infrastructure of the collectively incarcerated Palestinian people. For me, it's just farcically hypocritical for israel/pro-israelis to complain about those dehumanised and traumatised souls beating their chests in utter despair and frustration. It's equally disingenuous to use that same 'posturing' to justify yet more of the very oppression that left them no other way of airing their plight in the first place.

What do you mean playing football with an infant?

Sorry, thought someone had posted the baby football link here - seems not.

mariokenny.me/2014/09/10/elie-wiesel-by-sara-roy/

BTW, if you want to sleep well, don't follow the link at the top of that page to (historic) horror stories involving stealing organs (from Palestinians amongst others).

Big Brave IDF detain a tiny 7 year old: video

972mag.com/watch-israeli-forces-detain-7-year-old-palestinian-boy-in-hebron/96496/

What do you mean playing football with an infant?

i think she means child abuse?

this is why i find it increasingly difficult to give any credit to the idea that there is a debate here. on one side you have people who see palestinians as full human beings who should have human rights and be protected by international law. on the other? all i have seen is spurious attempts to equate the above with being pro hammas or anti semitic (or both).

what really is the argument against palestinians (or any population of civilians) having basic human rights and being protected by international law? without diversions, distractions, propaganda or dehumanising what is there to be said against human rights and international law applying to the palestinian people?

... Child abuse by the most 'moral' army in the world apparently.... as moral as saddam hussains army by the looks of it. Or is that Assads...?.. no wait.. Probably both.

Not sure they know the meaning of the word tbh.

still no evidence to support the allegations
sergeantmajor Thu 11-Sep-14 14:20:39

Dear all, I can't always reply as promptly as you would like. But I do wish to reply.

I am trying very hard to understand the anti-Israel position. I fully understand that humane people sympathise with the plight of the Palestinians and wish to see a just solution. But nothing else seems to make sense, or at least that is conducive to Israel's continued existence.

PigletJohn "He* won't say if he has seen anyone say "Israel should be annihilated." I don't recall seeing it. Perhaps it is what he thinks he saw." - actually yes, bang right, nobody has said those actual words but it is indeed what I think I am deducing from the thread. And while lots of people have denied saying it explictly, I suspect that if Israel ceased to exist, it would satisfy a lot of the people here.

So, if it is less inflammatory, perhaps we can substitute 'annihilate' with 'cease to exist'. Would anyone like to say that, despite being anti-Israel, they wish for its continued existence?

And whilst I suppose many may hold the position that they wish for the continuance of a Jewish state in the region yet are against their actions in Gaza, I would ask them which policies they think Israel should adopt towards a nation that does not wish for them to exist at all, which would allow this continuance.

Nobody has responded to my 'if-I-ruled-the-world challenge with a proposed solution to the crisis. Is that because I set a limit that in the new order neither side can cease to exist?

• • er, I'm a she, but no matter

Well i suspect you are an awfully suspicious ( read paranoid) person...and hence the irrational and irrelevant assumptions.

Still...i would like to take part in the challenge... But first please clarify which policies have specifically been mentioned in this thread that will lead to the annihilation of israel?

I would like to understand the mindset.

so indeed you did just 'make up' your statement that we all wish for the annihilation of israel. thanks for confirming that. any chance of an apology for flagrantly lying about the people on this thread and deliberately misrepresenting them?

let's be clear it's not ok to lie and malign and attribute views to a collective of people. just as it's not ok to conflate all palestinians with terrorism or label them snakes or 'not nice people like us' as has been frequently done on this thread.

if you wish to see people's views on what should be done i can highly recommend rtft.

But HoneyBadger, you are just maligning and attributing random views to me! I haven't done or said any of the things that you mentioned.

But I have asked questions which I think are pertinent to my accusation.

Would anyone like to say that, despite being anti-Israel, they wish for its continued existence, as a Jewish state in the Middle East?

Sergeant-major says "I am trying very hard to understand the anti-Israel position"

I am one of the people who criticise the actions of the State of Israel.

I criticise the theft of homes and land, the destruction of villages, the bulldozing of thousand-year-old olive groves. I criticise the killing and maiming of thousands of Palestinians, the great majority of them non-combatants and many of them children. I criticise Israel's apartheid wall. I criticise the oppression and inhumane treatment of Palestinians. I criticise the Illegal Settlements and the long term and continued theft of land. I criticise the Israeli blockade.

If Sergeant-major cannot understand my position then she may think she is trying hard. Obviously not hard enough.

Sergeant-major may choose to put her own interpretation on criticism of the acts of the State of Israel. This does not mean that her interpretation is true. It does however mean that she can comfort herself with the false justification that criticism is based on a desire to exterminate Israelis or to destroy Israel. This is however untrue. If she chooses to call people who criticise the actions of the State of Israel "anti-Israel posters" and to pretend that they have said, or secretly believe but have not said "Israel should be annihilated." then she is creating a false argument.

err no you really did say we wanted the anihilation of israel. or are you denying you said that? because it's just up there you know.