So, thus far we’ve established:

Arming and supporting an apartheid colonizing power is A-OK, as long as they serve the interests of those that fund them

War Crimes are bad when the other side does them

Natives are only allowed primitive weapons; when those weapons fail to hit military targets (and in the vast majority are intercepted by the Colony’s superior weapons systems), they can immediately be accused of attacking the Colony’s civilian population

The Colony’s civilian population are allowed to attack Natives, Natives are not allowed to fight back

Ukraine has every right to defend itself

Anything else?

So, thus far we’ve established:

Arming and supporting an apartheid colonizing power is A-OK, as long as they serve the interests of those that fund them

War Crimes are bad when the other side does them

Natives are only allowed primitive weapons; when those weapons fail to hit military targets (and in the vast majority are intercepted by the Colony’s superior weapons systems), they can immediately be accused of attacking the Colony’s civilian population

The Colony’s civilian population are allowed to attack Natives, Natives are not allowed to fight back

Ukraine has every right to defend itself

Anything else?

Stop posting rubbish.

We’ve established that Palestine and Ukraine are different in very important ways. That’s why they are treated differently.

If you’re serious about making things better for Palestinians, you’re going to need to devise some sort of peace treaty that makes it possible for an Israeli state and a Palestinian one to co-exist. Among the many difficult things that would require would be for Palestinians to stop attacking Israeli civilians and for Israel to return annexed lands. That’s the land-for-peace model. If you think you can find some way to persuade Israelis to return annexed land without Palestinians stopping attacks on Israel, please explain it. If all you’re going to do is post nonsense, you’re not taking Palestinian’s problems seriously, you’re just being a smartarse on the internet.

I’d be surprised if any of us were in a position to broker a groundbreaking international peace deal of a Sunday morning, but as usual, you’re conveniently forgetting something…

You’re avoiding the question. What do you propose as a deal that Israelis might accept? Do you believe that Israel can be persuaded to return land without an end to attacks on Israeli civilians? I don’t, but I’d be interested to hear what you think might a peace settlement might look like.

Could you explain where settler violence would fit into your narrative?

From the UN:

“Settler violence has always been an extremely disturbing feature of the Israeli occupation,” said the experts. “But in 2021, we are witnessing the highest recorded levels of violence in recent years and more severe incidents.

“The Israeli Government and its military have done far too little to curb this violence and to protect the Palestinians under siege. In several cases, Israeli security forces and outsourced private security companies stand by and take no action to prevent the violence; instead, they respond to settler-related violence by ordering Palestinians to leave the area, including Palestinian-owned land, or even actively support the settlers.”

According to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), already in the first 10 months of 2021, there have been 410 attacks by settlers against Palestinians (302 against property and 108 against individuals). Four Palestinians were killed by settlers this year. In 2020, there was a total of 358 recorded attacks. In 2019, there were 335 such attacks.

These settler attacks are primarily directed against rural Palestinian families living on small farms or in villages and towns in the occupied West Bank located in close proximity to Israeli settlements. Many of these Palestinians reside in the so-called “Area C” of the West Bank, which is under complete Israeli security and civil control, and where Israel’s de facto annexation stratagem is most evident.

The experts noted that settler violence has taken many forms, including physical violence, shooting with live ammunition, torching of fields and livestock, theft and vandalization of property, trees and crops, stone-throwing and tenacious intimidation of herders and their families. In the autumn, it is often directed towards Palestinians engaged in the olive harvest. Harvested olives are stolen or ruined. Olive trees are destroyed. Harvesters are attacked with rocks and pipes, or threatened with weapons.

On other occasions, settlers have seized private or public Palestinian land and brought sheep and cattle to graze on the land, as an initial step to drive Palestinians away from their land. If Palestinians attempt to keep their land, they are frequently met with violence.

“The ubiquity of these attacks, and the credible reports of the Israeli military’s passivity in combating this violence, has deepened the atmosphere of fear and coercion throughout the West Bank,” said the experts.

“We are very troubled by the failure of Israel, the occupying power, to exercise its substantial obligations under the Fourth Geneva Convention, including Article 27, to protect the population under occupation.”

According to Yesh Din, an Israeli human rights organization, 91 percent of investigations into settler attacks against Palestinians between 2005 and 2019 were closed by the Israeli authorities with no charges filed. Yesh Din has also reported that more than 40 percent of the Palestinians who have contacted the organization since 2018 to report settler violence have chosen not to file complaints with the Israeli authorities because they have no expectation that justice will be served.

“This precipitous rise in settler violence is not simply the result of a few ‘bad apples’ among the settler population,” the experts said. “The deep state support provided by Israel to the illegal settlement enterprise, including to the more than 140 settlement outposts established throughout the West Bank in defiance of even Israel’s own laws, has fueled this coercive environment and encouraged violence.

“In an atmosphere where the rights of the protected population are ignored, where settler violence is met with complicity and the prevailing political message from the occupying power is that this land belongs to only one people, the international community has a solemn responsibility to impose accountability measures to end this climate of impunity and to insist upon respect for the international rule of law.”

For someone who pesters incessantly for answers jhj, you don’t really like to do it yourself. No great surprise like, ever the sea-lion.

If we’re talking about brokering a peace deal, settler violence is an essential issue to address; I’m curious as to why thols never mentions it…

He’s just virtue signaling online. He has no serious idea about what it would take to achieve peace in Palestine. Hard to believe he takes the situation seriously if he hasn’t put any thought into what a solution would be.

Are insults a key part of the peace process?

If we’re talking about brokering a peace deal, settler violence is an essential issue to address; I’m curious as to why thols never mentions it…

I have. Back in the 1990s it seemed hopeful that a land-for-peace deal could go ahead. Moderate Israeli’s seemed open to it. However, extremists on both the Israeli and Palestinian sides set out to derail it by inflicting brutal attacks on civilians. Those attacks had no military purpose, they were deliberately intended to make a peace deal impossible. If there is ever to be a peace deal, attacks on civilians have to stop. There can be no peace deal while that is happening.

This is more problematic for Palestinians because there is no single Palestinian government that has a monopoly on the use of force, there are multiple armed groups vying for power. Some of those groups have made the destruction of Israel their rallying cry. That means that their very reason for existing is under threat by a peace deal. Extremist Israelis are dangerous too, but violence against Palestinians isn’t the rallying cry that unites Israelis, they are united by the desire to have a secure homeland for Jewish people. If an Israeli government can show that Israel is secure, it’s likely that moderate Israelis will accept it and understand that violence against Palestinians is an obstacle to security. It’s far more difficult for Palestinian militant groups to renounce violence and pledge loyalty to a single civilian government because the very reason for founding their organizations was to destroy Israel by violence.

Are insults a key part of the peace process?

Judging by this thread, a lot of forum users believe they are just fine. Go back and take a look. Keep in mind that several posts have been deleted by the moderators so you’ll miss the best stuff.

Anyway, jhj, when can we expect an outline of your proposal for a peace deal? Surely you’ve thought it through in detail, must have some great ideas ready to share.

First and foremost, a means of halting expansion of Israel’s territories would give a clear message to both sides that peace and stability was genuinely on the table.

This would mean full prosecution of settlers who had been found to indulge in violent behaviour, sabotage or coercion in pursuit of land grabs.

Given the history of Israel’s continued expansion, it would understandably take some time for the Palestinians to believe that the Israeli authorities were genuinely acting in the interests of the Palestinian people.

Similarly, collective punishment would have to end; this would mean ensuring consistent clean water and electricity supplies to the populations of Gaza and the West Bank.

The real shift would come from allowing children to integrate; all too often, people have been conditioned into views throughout the course of their lives and as such, are too stubborn to budge, leading to cycles of violence that span generations.

One of the main barriers to this are the billions of dollars at stake for those in the arms industry, who often use Gaza as a testing ground:

The idea that the Israeli arms industry benefits from the occupation through having a captive population it can test new weaponry on is now widely accepted.

Israel tries out weapons in the West Bank and Gaza and then presents them as “battle proven” to the international market.

The high-velocity tear gas canister has been heavily tested in Bilin. In 2009, the weapon killed Bassem Abu Rahmah, an unarmed local activist, protesting the wall slicing into that village. At the end of 2011, another protester, Mustafa Tamimi, was killed in Nabi Saleh by a tear gas canister, shot at his head.

There is a sense of weariness in Haddad’s voice. “I have seen how they are developing their tools and their weapons industry and the ways of dealing with the community,” he said. “And, in 30 years, I never heard once that there is any kind of accountability for any soldier.”

First and foremost, a means of halting expansion of Israel’s territories would give a clear message to both sides that peace and stability was genuinely on the table.

What is that means? Military? Diplomatic? If it’s military, who’s going to do it? It’s not going to be any Middle-Eastern country, they have absolutely no desire to get into another war with Israel. If it’s diplomatic, you’re going to have to negotiate with Israel and give them assurances that attacks on Israel will stop. How will you back up those assurances?

If a Palestinian group violate the deal and attack Israeli citizens, will you send armed troops into Palestine to disarm them? If an Israeli group violate it, will you be willing to send armed troops into Israel?

Extremists on both sides will attempt to derail any peace settlement that forces compromises on their side. If you can’t back your treaty up with soldiers and tanks and missiles, it will collapse. So, where do you plan on getting that army?

Blimey, sounds like you wanna sell more weapons!

Perhaps an army of cameras would be more effective:

Blimey, sounds like you wanna sell more weapons!

Quite the opposite, I want to know how you intend to disarm militants on both sides who refuse to lay down their weapons.

It’s the critical question that makes any peace deal so difficult to achieve. Your response makes it seem as though you are trying to avoid addressing the question.

Documenting and broadcasting attrocities has a long history of bringing those attrocities to a close…

Want warring parties to lay down their weapons? Halt the ammunition supply!

Want warring parties to lay down their weapons? Halt the ammunition supply!

Iran is supplying Palestinian groups with weapons. Do you have a plan to stop that? Invade Iran? Blockade Palestine? The rockets that Palestinians use are basically a pipe filled with fertilizer. Do you plan on confiscating all the pipes and all the fertilizer in Palestine.

Israel has a large weapons industry. Do you have some plan on how to prevent Israelis from making their own ammunition. Bomb them? Invade?

Blimey, sounds like you wanna sell more weapons!

Which bit of the post you responded to indicates this?

And quote it, without extrapolating with your own commentary of it to suit

Not meaning to have a dig, im just not seeing it.

If you can’t back your treaty up with soldiers and tanks and missiles, it will collapse. So, where do you plan on getting that army?

And for bonus points:

Bomb them? Invade?

Do I honestly think for a moment that the good folk of this forum are finally going to make that all important breakthrough that ensures peace in the land the majority of us have been taught since a young age is key to all that is holy?

Probably not… clearly there are many obstacles to overcome before than can be achieved;

That said, sanctions against Israel would surely be a start, which begs the question;

Why is Israel allowed to act with such impunity?

The US’s closest ally Israel is not a party to:

The Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT)
Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR)
Biological & Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC)
Intl Criminal Court (ICC)
Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM)
Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC)

— Adam H. Johnson (@adamjohnsonNYC) January 9, 2020

You’re trying to evade the question again. What do you propose to do if Israeli or Palestinian extremists violate the peace treaty you’ve suggested? It’s almost guaranteed that that will happen and everyone knows that, that’s why peace negotiations have always collapsed. If you want to sell it to moderate Israelis and Palestinians, you will need to explain how you will enforce it against heavily armed militias? If you find that Iran or Saudi Arabia or Russia or North Korea or China or some other country have been smuggling in weapons, what will you do about that?

Evidently you have all the answers, so fire away…

Evidently you have all the answers, so fire away…

I don’t have the answers. That’s why I’m asking you what you believe the answers are. But you just keep being evasive.

What will you do when your proposed peace settlement gets derailed by violent extremists, just like every previous attempt has been derailed?

Blimey, sounds like you wanna sell more weapons!

Which bit of the post you responded to indicates this?

And quote it, without extrapolating with your own commentary of it to suit

Not meaning to have a dig, im just not seeing it.

Once more for luck…

What will you do when your proposed peace settlement gets derailed by violent extremists, just like every previous attempt has been derailed?

Both sides have the means to capture and incarcerate extremists; at the end of the day, you have to show that such behaviour will not be tolerated; unfortunately, as it stands, that is not the case… see above:

“The Israeli Government and its military have done far too little to curb this violence and to protect the Palestinians under siege. In several cases, Israeli security forces and outsourced private security companies stand by and take no action to prevent the violence; instead, they respond to settler-related violence by ordering Palestinians to leave the area, including Palestinian-owned land, or even actively support the settlers.”

So what are your proposals for curbing colonialist settler violence, which is clearly one of the primary drivers for tensions?

Both sides have the means to capture and incarcerate extremists; at the end of the day, you have to show that such behaviour will not be tolerated; unfortunately, as it stands, that is not the case

The Palestinian leaders don’t. There isn’t a Palestinian state with a government that is accepted as legitimate by the majority of Palestinians. There are multiple groups vying for power in different areas, competing with each other. For many of them, killing Israelis is how they appeal to their followers. If a Palestinian government tried to arrest members of a rival group for killing Israelis, you’d end up with a civil war between Palestinians. Israelis know this and will never trust Palestinians to enforce any peace treaty.

Which leaves you with the question, if either side refuses to arrest militants who breach the peace agreement, what will you do? I know you hate answering questions, but this is the big question that both sides will demand answers to before any peace settlement is possible. No peace settlement is possible without answering that question.

I’d have big billboards in prominent spots on either side of the wall(s), broadcasting the awkward answers of those in the chain of command of the relevant authorities gave when questioned as to why they hadn’t arrested the extremists who were inflaming the conflict.

Hopefully this would have the desired effect and the civilian populations of either side would press for justice in the quest for peace.

Just to clarify, these are the walls I’m refering to:

I’d have big billboards in prominent spots on either side of the wall(s), broadcasting the awkward answers of those in the chain of command of the relevant authorities gave when questioned as to why they hadn’t arrested the extremists who were inflaming the conflict.

If the murderous armed militants who deliberately breached your peace deal just laugh at your billboards, what will you do then?

If billboards are the best answer you have to breaches of your peace deal, nobody on either side is going to trust you. A treaty needs an enforcement mechanism, a billboard isn’t going to satisfy Israelis or Palestinians.

Don’t knock it until you’ve tried it; in time it would force the authorities to act, or risk widespread civil disobedience.

I’m pretty sure that the Israeli/Palestinian peace talks have made more progress in the last 24 hours than this thread.

I’m pretty sure that the Israeli/Palestinian peace talks have made more progress in the last 24 hours than this thread.

Don’t knock it until you’ve tried it; in time it would force the authorities to act ignore it, or risk widespread civil disobedience executions of apostates.

FTFY.

Do you seriously believe that some billboards will solve a violent conflict that has been raging for over 70 years?

That’s a question, by the way. An answer would show that you are serious about improving the lives of Palestinians.

Well, on the bright side, the OP’s question has been answered. Ukraine and Palestine are not the same. The Palestinian conflict can be solved by sending some billboards, the Ukrainian conflict cannot.

Well, on the bright side, the OP’s question has been answered. Ukraine and Palestine are not the same. The Palestinian conflict can be solved by sending some billboards, the Ukrainian conflict cannot.

This hilarious comment conceals a truth that the OP’s question has been answered with what we all knew anyway – it is in the (perceived) strategic interests of the US, and of the US Jewish lobby, to continue to support Israel while it does the same thing that the Russians do in aggressively occupying a neighbour’s land. Bad luck for the Palestinians.

Lest we become too abstract, let’s remind ourselves of what that bad luck looked ljke for 16 children:

https://www.dci-palestine.org/16_palestinian_children_in_gaza_dead_after_israeli_military_offensive

Bad luck for the Palestinians.

So, you don’t think that billboards will solve the problem?

What sort of peace treaty do you think will convince moderate Israelis and Palestinians to disarm the extremists and establish a Palestinian state that can coexist with an Israeli one?

That’s not the subject of this thread; if you want to discuss that question start another topic. But as a general comment I’d say you can’t get there from where you are starting. You can’t get to justice while pretending that there’s an equivalence between the aggressor and the victim.

That’s not the subject of this thread; if you want to discuss that question start another topic. But as a general comment I’d say you can’t get there from where you are starting. You can’t get to justice while pretending that there’s an equivalence between the aggressor and the victim.

Fair enough. The subject of the thread was whether Palestine and Ukraine were similar situations. We’ve seen a proposal that the Palestinian situation can be resolved by posting images on billboards. I doubt that, but it would be useful if you explained how you think the Palestinian conflict can be resolved. If you think the same solutions apply to the Ukrainian conflict, that would also be great to hear.

Arming and supporting an apartheid colonizing power is A-OK, as long as they serve the interests of those that fund them

War Crimes are bad when the other side does them

Natives are only allowed primitive weapons; when those weapons fail to hit military targets (and in the vast majority are intercepted by the Colony’s superior weapons systems), they can immediately be accused of attacking the Colony’s civilian population

The Colony’s civilian population are allowed to attack Natives, Natives are not allowed to fight back

Stop posting rubbish.

To be fair I’m struggling to spot much “rubbish” in jhj’s post thois – which bits are you disputing?

Going through it……United States governments obviously support an apartheid regime (and it is obviously apartheid, ie, separate development based on ethnicity) because it serves their interests to do so.

You would have to be naive and gullible to believe that the US is motivated by concern or a sense of moral obligation. US governments don’t give a monkeys about their own citizens, as their callous disregard for those who can’t afford medical care or their jack shit response to hurricane Katrina proves, so they certainly aren’t going to worry about people living thousands of miles away.

And they are indeed perfectly ready to back, even install, brutal bloody regimes if they feel it serves their interests.

Further more throughout the 1950s the US was actually quite hostile towards Israel and rather pro-arab. During this period France was Israel’s closest ally and main arms supplier. Things, for various reasons, none of them to do with morality, started to change under President Kennedy untill we reached the point where we are today where for mostly geopolitical reasons the US props up Israel to a staggering level.

Don’t expect that to necessarily continue, if, or more likely when, the Middle East ceases to be a region of special interest to the US. The United States spent over $2 trillion in 20 years in Afghanistan, such was their commitment to it – look how quickly they abandoned and left it.

jhj war crimes comment also appears perfectly valid to me. Or are seriously going to argue that Israel is regularly condemned by Western governments for its war crimes?

On jhj’s point that Palestinians are only allowed to have primitive weapons to fight against the illegal occupation of their lands and are then criticised for their inaccuracy, you yourself have made precisely that point, repeatedly in fact.

And jhj’s final point concerning how armed Israeli civilians are able to attack Palestinians with relative impunity, whilst Palestinians fighting back are swiftly dealt with, also appears perfectly valid.

Blimey, there’s a lot been happening here in my absence!