[Closed] Is Israel's Government against peace?

"Surely a peaceful agreement if more important than new homes?"

actually, being seen not to back down, ever, for any reason is more important than peace.

The State of Israel was born with and remains in the mindset that they are under siege. Any action they take can thus be justified that they are defending their state against people who would do them wrong.

and the biggest crime of all is that America has until very recently blindly supported Israel. It makes Israel like the littel guy who always picks a fight because they know the big bloke is behind them to back them up.

It saddens and angers me in equal measure really.

this won't go well

Is Israel's Government against peace?

of course they are
Where have you been for the last 60 years?

Free Palestine.

I blame the Hittites.

The State of Israel was born with and remains in the mindset that they are under siege. Any action they take can thus be justified that they are defending their state against people who would do them wrong.

There's also the fact that there is a very vocal, sizeable and powerful lobby in Israel which truly believes that Jews are the chosen people, and that all of Jerusalem etc is the promised land, and that they have the god given right/duty to take it over and settle it.
🙄

imo, it's quite clear the israeli's are in the wrong here. They accepted the 1949 green line and now are trying to move it. Whether the palestinians choose to accept it or not is a moot point as they weren't party to the 1949 agreement.

i also like the israeli condemnation of iran's nuclear programme. 😉

The jewish nation has been beaten and bullied for generations (it's like abused children). If things aren't kept under control the hideous cycle continues. Unfortunately big step-daddy America has let the kids charge around in the pub annoying everyone for so long things are going to kick off.

imo, it's quite clear the israeli's are in the wrong here.

It is but the question is, is anyone going to do anything about it? The US has always been firmly against any kind of sanctions or punishments for Israel - despite them clearly breaking many laws and UN resolutions over the years.

Anti-semitism has a long, vile history and the state of Israel's attitude to the people around it is the result of centuries of persecution by cultures such as our own.

The Israelis treat their neighbours like dogs and this isn't right, but it's inevitable. Why?

Because their neighbours want to wipe them out to a man, woman and child - finishing the job from which the Nazi's were prevented.

It's a deep, pus-filled cancerous running sore that started a very long time ago when someone put it about that being Jewish was some sort of a problem and has been building ever since.

If you think that a solution to all this can be found amongst a bunch of glib posts on a bike forum from partial advocates of particular points of view, who see only what they think justifies their political stance "du jour" - you are going to be dissappointed.

If you think that a solution to all this can be found amongst a bunch of glib posts on a bike forum from partial advocates of particular points of view, who see only what they think justifies their political stance "du jour" - you are going to be dissappointed.

Did the OP suggest that he was going to be able to find a solution here, or did he just start a discussion about the political issues in the area?

If you think that a solution to all this can be found amongst a bunch of glib posts on a bike forum from partial advocates of particular points of view, who see only what they think justifies their political stance "du jour" - you are going to be dissappointed.

I wanted to know what people on here think about the situation.
If you think posts on here are pointless why are you reading and posting?

Their neighbours want to wipe them out to a man, woman and child - finishing the job from which the Nazi's were prevented.

Their neighbours mostly want to get on with their lives - work, shop, go to school, farm etc. 99% of any population just want to get on with their lifes (without being shot at or bombed).

My 'du jour' stance started 25 years ago.

Their neighbours mostly want to get on with their lives -

Hamas. Hezbollah. Iran. Syria. Saudi Arabia (to whom, of course, we sell arms).

I wanted to know what people on here think about the situation.
If you think posts on here are pointless why are you reading and posting?[b]

Then you do not fall into the category that I mentioned. But if you do, then I repeat my assertion.

What you WILL find, I suspect, is the same series of futile objections and canards from all sides that are repeated ad neauseum on this forum and others whenever this subject comes up.

I suppose at the least, it is a fine example of the futility of trying to resolve the situation by playing the blame game from whatever quarter you feel harbours your particular sympathies.

Nothing will be resolved until 1: the Israelis feel they are not under threat and 2: their neighbours honestly want to come to an accommodation so everybody can move forward.

What Mr whoppit said.

... and religion is still the elephant in the room.

[i]Nothing will be resolved until 1: the Israelis feel they are not under threat and 2: their neighbours honestly want to come to an accommodation so everybody can move forward[/i]

An interesting example of not "playing the blame game" here from the ever dispassionnate MrWoppit. 😉

Leku, while I'd dispute your first sentence, the issue that brought the OPs question is whether its right for Israel to build on East Jerusalem and other Palestinian lands. How exactly does that help peace? or is it simply an attempt at inflaming tha situation?.
Given Netanyahus previous stance, I know which one I believe.

BigDummy - Member

Nothing will be resolved until 1: the Israelis feel they are not under threat and 2: their neighbours honestly want to come to an accommodation so everybody can move forward

An interesting example of not "playing the blame game" here from the ever dispassionnate MrWoppit.

If you like.

west kipper - Member

Leku, while I'd dispute your first sentence, the issue that brought the OPs question is whether its right for Israel to buid on East Jerusalem and other Palestinian lands. How exactly does that help peace? or is it simply an attempt at inflaming tha situation?.
Given Netanyahus previous stance, I know which one I believe.

... and so turns the wheel...

Aye, and it'll keep turning, Mr Woppit, until some people start to understand the question.

So Mr Woppit - at what point do you think Israel will no longer feel under threat (despite being the only nuclear power in the region, backed by the US etc etc)?

grum - Member

So Mr Woppit - at what point do you think Israel will no longer feel under threat (despite being the only nuclear power in the region, backed by the US etc etc)?

When it's neighbours stop calling for it's extermination.

Sorry, I thought I had made that obvious?

...and religion is still the elephant in the room.

When it's neighbours stop calling for it's extermination.

Maybe they would if Israel obeyed international law, stopped the inhumane treatment of the Palestinians, stopped annexing territory, etc etc?

...and religion is still the elephant in the room.

Is that the Jewish religion or the Muslim religion?

So the rhetoric from several, but not all, of its neighbours governments gives Israel the right to displace and persecute the lands original inhabitants.
I cant see how that'll settle the situation down, nor make things any safer for ordinary Israelis, for that matter.

So why DID Israel scupper the latest attempt at peace talks I wonder? Could it be they have no real interest in peace?

I didn't mention "rights". When threatened, any human individually or grouped, tend to react either by avoiding the situation or if that is not possible, resort to the strongest possible reaction.

That is what Israel is doing. If the threat were to dissappear, so would the Israeli's aggression.

Whilst I think about it - if all the Palestinian population want to do is simply get on with their life, then surely some responsibility for their situation should be recognised as belonging to Hamas, who perpetuate the situation, unlike their rivals in Fatah, who appear to be more interested in discussion.

A visit to Hamas' website seems to suggest that they are more interested in fighting an unwinnable battle for the glory of martyring those over whom they have responsibility? Again - I'm not suggesting this makes Israel's actions excusable, just highlighting the situation.

Is that the Jewish religion or the Muslim religion?

Both in particular, and all, in general.

Anti-semitism

PS: Thinking about it, I recall a report that suggested that Israeli forces in the area think of Palestinians as being little more than "sub-human" and therefore have no problem treating them as such.

A fine example of the '60's homily - "What goes around, comes around"...

The SPECIFIC question that was asked, mr woppit, was whether the increased building on Palestinian lands, against international law, is going to bring peace.
Even an apologist like yourself, can surely see that it wont.
Or do the Palestinians, many of whom are neither enthusiastic supporters of the corrupt Fatah, nor the extremist Hamas, not matter?.

Junkyard's analysis of the phrase "anti-semitism" is technically correct. I think, however, that we all recognise that the phrase is used to mean "anti-Jewish" in general usage?

It's probably a bit flippant, but I'm suddenly reminded of:

west kipper - Member

The SPECIFIC question that was asked, mr woppit, was whether the increased building on Palestinian lands, against international law, is going to bring peace.
Even an apologist like yourself, can surely see that it wont.
Or do the Palestinians, many of whom are neither enthusiastic supporters of the corrupt Fatah, nor the extremist Hamas, not matter?.

I understand the specific question, I wanted however, to address the wider question, if that's OK with you.

I think you'll find if you read my posts that I am not offering any apologies, merely trying to illustrate reasons why.

Again, if actually read what I've written, you'll see that I have addressed your issue of the Palestinian's aspirations as against their leaders'.

So now we move into the typical STW forum "Having to repeat oneself all over again because the critic doesn't seem to have actually read what was posted previousy" territory. Which is tedious.

As to what will bring peace - an agreement to cease hostilities on both sides, of course. Followed by free passage of people and goods in the region. But you and I know that is not going to happen.

In my opinion, the best we can hope for is that things remain as they are. However, the situation in Iran does not hold out much hope for this as even a medium-term solution. It's not a question of if the Israelis are going to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities, only "when".

A fine example of the '60's homily - "What goes around, comes around"...

What exactly did the Palestinians do to deserve their current treatment?

To me is sounds more like "...those to whom evil is done, do evil in return."

That is what Israel is doing. If the threat were to dissappear, so would the Israeli's aggression.

Is it? I think they must have some other motives that I can't quite grasp. By constantly expanding they are increasingly antagonising their neighbours, by continuing in this way they are just making it ever harder to actually reach an agreement because these agreements are going to have to based on giving back most of not all the land seized since 1949.

Been meaning to read Jeremy Bowen's book on this, might go get it a lunchtime.

If the threat were to dissappear, so would the Israeli's aggression.

Or vice versa.

A fine example of the '60's homily - "What goes around, comes around"...

Think you've missed the point of that homily somewhat.

So now we move into the typical STW forum "Having to repeat oneself all over again because the critic doesn't seem to have actually read what was posted previousy" territory. Which is tedious.

Please feel free not to bother posting any more then. Perhaps you should go to an audiophile forum where you can talk about the differences you have convinced yourself you can hear between two ludicrously expensive cables without fear of mockery.

I think that the centuries-old vilification and maltreatment of Jewish people has resulted in their self-justifide maltreatment of the Palestinians. As I said, their armed forces now regard Palestinians in the same way that their forbears were regarded by most of the rest of OUR forbears.

"What goes around, comes around" seems perfectly apposite to me.

Mr Woppit, by originally failing to understand the precise meaning of the phrase'anti-semitic' you kinda give away your lack of knowledge in this issue.
I had you pegged as one of these "Israel has the right to do as it pleases-types" but I think you're just trying to argue for the sake of it...

What exactly did the Palestinians do to deserve their current treatment?

Nothing.

Please feel free not to bother posting any more then. Perhaps you should go to an audiophile forum where you can talk about the differences you have convinced yourself you can hear between two ludicrously expensive cables without fear of mockery.

I don't recall needing your permission for anything, though you seem to think you have that power... I've no desire to return to a long-dead and pointless discussion that you mention, thankyou. I'll stick with this one. As I said, it seems generic that many posters misread or don't read previously put arguments in these complicated and long threads so one has to repeat and defend points already made. Perhaps the phrase "I refer the you to my previous post on this subject" might force a little more focus.

However, I am interested in the subject being discussed, rather than what any self-appointed censor such as yourself might wish to blowhard about...

"What goes around, comes around" seems perfectly apposite to me.

Except that the phrase is generally used to mean 'do bad things to others and expect bad things to happen to you'. I don't recall Palestinians being involved in the Jewish holocaust.

edit: wow you're pompous!! 😆

Mr Woppit, by originally failing to understand the precise meaning of the phrase'anti-semitic' you kinda give away your lack of knowledge in this issue.

Not at all, I am simply using the phrase in the way it is generally used - to mean "anti-jewish", as once again, I have already said earlier.

I was trying to widen the discussion to reflect on the greater tragedy of human history, of which this situation is just one sorry example, but I now see that I have merely enabled the champions of sidetracked particularity to start drilling.

White phosphorous on a civillian population? However you dress it up, that's not a nice thing to do

edit: wow you're pompous!!

Sorry if it reads like that. I'm actually attempting clarity..

Except that the phrase is generally used to mean 'do bad things to others and expect bad things to happen to you'. I don't recall Palestinians being involved in the Jewish holocaust.

I take your point. I can't think of a handy phrase that describes the handing-on of maltreatment to the inncoent, and then from the those affected, to other underserving receivers, but that's what I was trying to get at. That seems to be how this stuff gets started all over, to me.

Perhaps if more people laid their HiFi cable the right way round, the world would be a happier place, eh?

Whilst I think about it - if all the Palestinian population want to do is simply get on with their life, then surely some responsibility for their situation should be recognised as belonging to Hamas, who perpetuate the situation, unlike their rivals in Fatah, who appear to be more interested in discussion.

As previously observed, Palestinians are interested in raising their kids, getting a job, making their lives better. If there was a party that had been able to deliver that for them, they would support it. However, no Palestinian leader has delivered anything whatsoever, because Israel has not given them anything. Palestinians feel helpless and powerless and unable to do anything other than make a feeble protest by supporting Hamas, who, as they can't offer anything in this life, make their promises for the next.

If Israel wanted peace, they could have it tomorrow on terms that any reasonable person would consider favourable. However, they see that if they keep going the way they are, then the Palestinians will eventually be driven out of the land, by starvation, or bombs, and, with America's help, a Jewish state can be established over the whole of hsitoric Palestine.

Vile as they may be, they are probably correct in that judgement.

However, no Palestinian leader has delivered anything whatsoever, because Israel has not given them anything. Palestinians feel helpless and powerless and unable to do anything other than make a feeble protest by supporting Hamas, who, as they can't offer anything in this life, make their promises for the next.

Yes. Shite all round, eh?

If you were the Israeli government, how would you open a discussion with Hamas, and what would you give them?

Although I think Ehud Barak adopted a conciliatory posture in the past and got it thrown back at him, if memory serves...

Except that the phrase is generally used to mean 'do bad things to others and expect bad things to happen to you'. I don't recall Palestinians being involved in the Jewish holocaust.

Which was the point I was trying to make earlier and is certainly a lot more explicit and saves me some typing.

I take your point. I can't think of a handy phrase that describes the handing-on of maltreatment to the inncoent, and then from the those affected, to other underserving receivers, but that's what I was trying to get at. That seems to be how this stuff gets started all over, to me.

Did you read the whole of my last post? There is a WH Auden quote that sums this up quite well.

Although I think Ehud Barak adopted a conciliatory posture in the past and got it thrown back at him, if memory serves..

What did he offer, concretely? Nothing. Hence the current situation.

gonefishin - Member

Did you read the whole of my last post? There is a WH Auden quote that sums this up quite well.

"...those to whom evil is done, do evil in return."

Ah yes. Sorry, I missed that. Perfectly put.

... and religion is still the elephant in the room.

Surely this is one example that shows religion is not always a problem, cultural differences which cause conflict can come from a variety of sources.

In this case the Jewish, Christian and Muslims populations were getting on as well as you can expect a 19th century population groups to get on under the Ottoman empire.

The problems started to occur when Europeans decided another group of "mainly" eastern Europeans should be moved to a different continent.

This would nt have been a problem in the 19th Century as which ever side had the greatest military strength would have just wiped the other side out. However the world is nicer place now adays and that cant happen but we dont seem to have any other ideas how to sort it out.

In fact the Christian + Muslim Arabs still get on reasonably well so surely religion isnt the main problem.

Also many Zionists were not religious

modern Zionist movement, beginning in the late 19th century, was mainly founded by secular Jews,

They simply believed they were descended from people who had inhabited and had a kingdom in Palestine in the past, because at the time the Bible was also probably the best historical source for the region. Currently the bible is seen as basically correct back to 600BC before that point its not clear what is over exaggeration and what is totally made up.

It gets on my nerves that people seem to think you can separate "religion" from "culture" especially before the second world war.

DrJ - Member

Although I think Ehud Barak adopted a conciliatory posture in the past and got it thrown back at him, if memory serves..

.

What did he offer, concretely? Nothing. Hence the current situation.

Withdrawal from south Lebanon, wasn't it? Actually done, as I recall. Could have been something to build on, maybe - the Israeli forces were there in response to an attack by Hezbollah, I think.

Perhaps that wasn't enough, but it could have been at least, a start. Didn't he go on to address other issues?

scu98rkr

Interesting.

Currently the bible is seen as basically correct back to 600BC before that point its not clear what is over exaggeration and what is totally made up.

I think that bit about getting 2 elephants and 2 kangaroos and everything on that boat thingy was a bit made up.

Mohammed was a Christian when he was a nipper.

Jesus was a jew when he was a nipper, but then converted to Buddhism, and when he got into a bit of bother, his mates smuggled him out and he went to spend the rest of his long life in Srinigar.

I think that bit about getting 2 elephants and 2 kangaroos and everything on that boat thingy was a bit made up.

Im not really sure what your point is. Im trying to say that 19th Century secular ie non-religious Zionists believed that the parts of Bible related to the history of the Kingdoms of Israel/Judah just as strongly as religious Jews. Because frankly at the time it was the best historical source.

Hence why even though they weren't religious they want to create a state in Palestine, at the time the religious jews didnt cause they still thought the messiah would create it.

My Gran lived in Jerusalem in the 20's - her family left the area as they could sense the tension rising, she's told me how more and more houses were being turned into fortresses...

In the 6 days war most of Israel's neighbours conspired to lauch an unprovoked genocidal attack on the state of Israel. But they lost and quite naturally Israel has since taken advantage of the land they gained as a result of winning the war - pretty much like the Uk , USA and most western nations have done in the distant and not so distant past.

If you don't want to lose territory then don't pick on a nation that basically doesn't f*** around when it come to defending itself

Is it? I think they must have some other motives that I can't quite grasp.

As previously observed, Palestinians are interested in raising their kids, getting a job, making their lives better. If there was a party that had been able to deliver that for them, they would support it. However, no Palestinian leader has delivered anything whatsoever, because Israel has not given them anything. Palestinians feel helpless and powerless and unable to do anything other than make a feeble protest by supporting Hamas, who, as they can't offer anything in this life, make their promises for the next.

No better way of justifying it's actions than having a terrorist threat on it's doorstep in the forms of hizbollah and Hamas. Israel will continue to wreck any kind of meaningful peace negotiations until it has achieved it's goals.

It's old war propaganda, Demonize your enemy to justify your actions.