Israel and Zionism

[Baducchi]

The Palestinian leadership has always been weak, weaker than the Jews. Frankly, the Jews have always taken advantage of this to put themselves in a superior public relations position. They play the western game better than the Palestinians.

I think a more accurate statement would be that the Israelis are much more aligned with the US, with Europe. Keep in mind, a decent percentage of the Israelis were Americans and/or Europeans. That isn't PR. That's reality. They play the Western game better because so many are western. In terms of PR, specifically PR, I would not be so quick to say that Israel does a better job than the Palestinians. I'd say the opposite.

[jhu72]

... And that conflation is at the root of Islamphobic bigotry.

Fair enough. Let me it say it this way. Jihadists hate western values, hate America. Hamas hates western values, hates America. Many Palestinians hate western values, hate America. Not Muslims. Muslims is too broad a word.

... I don't buy this.

[Baducchi]

... I don't buy this.

what don't you buy?

[jhu72]

The Palestinian leadership has always been weak, weaker than the Jews. Frankly, the Jews have always taken advantage of this to put themselves in a superior public relations position. They play the western game better than the Palestinians.

I think a more accurate statement would be that the Israelis are much more aligned with the US, with Europe. Keep in mind, a decent percentage of the Israelis were Americans and/or Europeans. That isn't PR. That's reality. They play the Western game better because so many are western. In terms of PR, specifically PR, I would not be so quick to say that Israel does a better job than the Palestinians. I'd say the opposite.

Israel plays to the west better than the Palestinians. The problem is, more people in the west are learning to play the game, and see it for what it is.

[jhu72]

... I don't buy this.

what don't you buy?

... that Palestinians have greater hate for the US / west than the Muslims.

[Kismet]

Let's not forget that TWO architects of peace in the region - Sadat and Rabin were both assassinated by those opposing their desire for peace and co-existence.

[Baducchi]

... that Palestinians have greater hate for the US / west than the Muslims.

your language is cloudy but i assume what you mean is that Palestinians do not have a greater hate for the US / west than the average Muslim (outside of the US). You might be right.

[jhu72]

... that Palestinians have greater hate for the US / west than the Muslims.

your language is cloudy but i assume what you mean is that Palestinians do not have a greater hate for the US / west than the average Muslim (outside of the US). You might be right.

That is my meaning.

[jhu72]

... it is being reported that Bibi is now saying he can accept the US concept of the PLO administrating Gaza post Hamas.

[a fan]

You slready have sll the infio you need to answer your own question. I have provided you ample information to give you the needed background i formation but you gave rather obviously refused to pursue it. The your posts clearly indicate you are clueless about the origins and dynamics about the conflict. That is on you. As a result your analysis is way out of touch. You have not pursued the knowledge required.

You are Brookie-lite.

You start with the conclusion: the Jewish people stole this land. And want to discuss the minutia of how you're certain it's stolen, and where the Israelis took more land, etc.

Naturally, you've never bothered looking at old maps that show, for example, that most of Jordan and parts of Egypt was Palestine.

Does Egypt or Jordan have to give this "stolen land" back? Or ONLY the Israelis?

More to the point: you gonna give back your stolen land to the Native Americans? Or do ONLY the Jewish people have to give "stolen" land back?

Good luck answering that.

-------------

Where peace will come from is:

1. ignore who supposedly owned what where. It's 100% irrelevant, and the ENTIRE reason we've been dealing with this stupidity for going on 100 years
2. put the UN in charge of Gaza.
3. pump money into Gaza so that people there have a nice life
4. this makes it so that extremists won't hold sway in Gaza anymore, and Israel will FINALLY have someone to negotiate with
5. if we have peace in the region because people have jobs and opportunity? No one cares who owns what anymore, and fences come down, and folks will be able to come and go freely.

This should have happened YEARS ago, but it's because of people like you who want to quibble over stupid pieces of land, without admitting that EVERYONE is living on "stolen land" all around the world, and that maps and border change ALL THE TIME.

How about we solve the problem of "stolen land" by giving the entire region back to the Romans---who "owned" that land long before the other interested parties?

The REASON this conflict exists, is the the world is holding Israel to a standard that no one else is held to, OCanada.

And if you think I'm lying: go right ahead and hand the deed to your home over to the nearest Native American tribe. THEN I'll believe that you're honestly worried about "stolen land".

[MDlaxfan76]

.

In the summer of 2000 at Camp David, Ehud Barak gave a very generous offer (and the world agreed, Jews and Israelis were dumbfounded by the generosity) to Arafat, a two-state solution and Yasser Arafat rejected the offer. How does that work with your supposition that Israel has never wanted a two-state solution? Please, educate us...

No he did not

https://carnegieendowment.org/2020/07/1 ... -pub-82287

Just read this link and while I read lots of frustration and explaining why the two closest call efforts failed, under Carter and Clinton, it is also 100% clear from this recount that what Israel was offering was a two-state peace solution and that Arafat rejected the deal. Did Israel offer enough, did all all issues get resolved? According to this participant, no, the deal was never enough to overcome Arafat's suspicions. But it could have been accepted as a first step toward the outcome...the alternative was a continued terrorist posture. And Arafat chose the latter. He believed that his population was not supportive of accepting the deal.

So, seems to me that Israel's moderate/left wing did try to go down this path but those efforts were not enough to sway Arafat and the PLO which controlled the Palestinian position. I don't think the Palestinians, whether under PLO or Hamas, have ever offered a two-state resolution or security for Israel's ongoing objective to have a safe homeland for Jews. Not in my 67 year lifetime.

But put aside the past failures, if the answer is ever to be a peaceful resolution with two states side by side it is going to require very different leadership on both sides and very different public sentiment from both populations in support...it's not going to happen tomorrow, but steps in that direction could be taken.

... you talk like Arafat could make a decision, he was the final authority in that period. That is ahistorical. He was the leader of the PLO which was far from speaking for the most radical Palestinians / Muslims. He could not just snap his finger and have all of Palestine fall into place. The peace process (any) is always contingent on the willingness of most extreme faction on each side. The truth is there has always been a faction among the Palestinians who don't want peace. Same for the Jews. I believe you know this, but your writing seems to ignore these facts.

The Palestinian leadership has always been weak, weaker than the Jews. Frankly, the Jews have always taken advantage of this to put themselves in a superior public relations position. They play the western game better than the Palestinians.

(As OC puts it, make an offer then undermine your own offer. The time averaged seriousness of the Jewish offers can be measured by the amount of land the Jews have taken illegally from the UN perspective.)

First, yes, I do know that "there has always been a faction among the Palestinians who don't want peace. Same for the Jews."

Yup.

And I do agree that ultimately the most militant factions on both sides need to be 'persuaded' that they need to accept the outcome of peace or go to jail, or worse. But continued terrorism and bullying is not an option, and that injunction needs to come from Palestinians to Palestinians, Jews to Jews.

I'm not pounding Arafat nor making excuses for Israeli right wing intransigence, but I do think that there have been points in time when Israeli leadership sincerely wanted to bring this tow a peaceful two state outcome and they have never been met with strong enough leadership on the Palestinians side to make real progress.

Unfortunately, I don't think there is a snap your fingers, everyone agrees, answer...it's going to take multiple steps and trust building and that's going to require very different leadership and public sentiment on both sides.

[MDlaxfan76]

... that Palestinians have greater hate for the US / west than the Muslims.

your language is cloudy but i assume what you mean is that Palestinians do not have a greater hate for the US / west than the average Muslim (outside of the US). You might be right.

That is my meaning.

Seriously? There are a heck of a lot of Muslims in the world, outside of the US, who do not hate the US...but it is accurate that most of them see and favor the Palestinian perspective, which includes blaming the US for its intransigent support of Israel, no matter the behavior of Israel.

[MDlaxfan76]

... And that conflation is at the root of Islamphobic bigotry.

Fair enough. Let me it say it this way. Jihadists hate western values, hate America. Hamas hates western values, hates America. Many Palestinians hate western values, hate America. Not Muslims. Muslims is too broad a word.

Sure, it is fair to say that jihadi extremists "hate western values, hate America", indeed see us as the "Great Satan". Mostly, I'd argue, because we have supported Israel so intransigently (not arguing about that choice, but one repercussion is that it makes us their foe in their viewpoint).

Some, even perhaps many, Palestinians are jihadi extremists.
Certainly Hamas is, and there are lots of Palestinian civilians who have supported Hamas, cheered them on.
Not all, but a lot. Too many!

Decades of real trauma and bigoted propaganda.

Yes, Muslims is way too strong, factually incorrect.

Thanks for discussing civilly.

[jhu72]

Israel is losing the war against Hamas. I can't judge the veracity but an article worth reading. Certainly a minority report.

[jhu72]

.

In the summer of 2000 at Camp David, Ehud Barak gave a very generous offer (and the world agreed, Jews and Israelis were dumbfounded by the generosity) to Arafat, a two-state solution and Yasser Arafat rejected the offer. How does that work with your supposition that Israel has never wanted a two-state solution? Please, educate us...

No he did not

https://carnegieendowment.org/2020/07/1 ... -pub-82287

Just read this link and while I read lots of frustration and explaining why the two closest call efforts failed, under Carter and Clinton, it is also 100% clear from this recount that what Israel was offering was a two-state peace solution and that Arafat rejected the deal. Did Israel offer enough, did all all issues get resolved? According to this participant, no, the deal was never enough to overcome Arafat's suspicions. But it could have been accepted as a first step toward the outcome...the alternative was a continued terrorist posture. And Arafat chose the latter. He believed that his population was not supportive of accepting the deal.

So, seems to me that Israel's moderate/left wing did try to go down this path but those efforts were not enough to sway Arafat and the PLO which controlled the Palestinian position. I don't think the Palestinians, whether under PLO or Hamas, have ever offered a two-state resolution or security for Israel's ongoing objective to have a safe homeland for Jews. Not in my 67 year lifetime.

But put aside the past failures, if the answer is ever to be a peaceful resolution with two states side by side it is going to require very different leadership on both sides and very different public sentiment from both populations in support...it's not going to happen tomorrow, but steps in that direction could be taken.

... you talk like Arafat could make a decision, he was the final authority in that period. That is ahistorical. He was the leader of the PLO which was far from speaking for the most radical Palestinians / Muslims. He could not just snap his finger and have all of Palestine fall into place. The peace process (any) is always contingent on the willingness of most extreme faction on each side. The truth is there has always been a faction among the Palestinians who don't want peace. Same for the Jews. I believe you know this, but your writing seems to ignore these facts.

The Palestinian leadership has always been weak, weaker than the Jews. Frankly, the Jews have always taken advantage of this to put themselves in a superior public relations position. They play the western game better than the Palestinians.

(As OC puts it, make an offer then undermine your own offer. The time averaged seriousness of the Jewish offers can be measured by the amount of land the Jews have taken illegally from the UN perspective.)

First, yes, I do know that "there has always been a faction among the Palestinians who don't want peace. Same for the Jews."

Yup.

And I do agree that ultimately the most militant factions on both sides need to be 'persuaded' that they need to accept the outcome of peace or go to jail, or worse. But continued terrorism and bullying is not an option, and that injunction needs to come from Palestinians to Palestinians, Jews to Jews.

I'm not pounding Arafat nor making excuses for Israeli right wing intransigence, but I do think that there have been points in time when Israeli leadership sincerely wanted to bring this tow a peaceful two state outcome and they have never been met with strong enough leadership on the Palestinians side to make real progress.

Unfortunately, I don't think there is a snap your fingers, everyone agrees, answer...it's going to take multiple steps and trust building and that's going to require very different leadership and public sentiment on both sides.

I agree at points Israeli leadership has wanted peace, but I really don't believe there has been a point where the extremists wanted peace, Palestinian or Jewish. Both need to be removed from the scene.

PS: just saw a short Reuters report claiming the Palestinian street is starting to turn on Hamas, blaming them for the Palestinian death toll. We will see.

[tech37]

My earliest recollection of anything having to do with Palestinians (and it was more than enough for me) was when the Black Sept Group murdered the Israeli Olympic athletes in 1972. I'm surprised no one has brought this up and if they have, apologies. Those murders were nothing compared to Oct 7 but at the time absolutely horrific. My mind was made up early on re which side of the struggle I would support.

[OCanada]

That was never going to work. It is however a typical Israeli negotiating tactic. Make an offer and then undermine it.

Israeli from the beginning violated compacts. They forced Palestinians from their lands. After creation of the state of Israel they again forced Palestinians from their land bcs of the war. The promised them they could return and gave them receipts. Then they refused fo let them return. The distrust has been built up over decades. It is the land at the heart of the issue. Israel wants all of it w no Palestinians. Not unlike some events in this country. Palestinians would like the promises made at the beginning. The arab nations have not shown they cate about the Palestinians for any reason except as a tool for their own goals. The distrust has a deep base in experience.

You speak repeatedly about Israel and the Israelis, how they are not worthy of trust, that they are an extremely difficult, if not impossible, partner to work with. Do you lay any blame on the Palestinians?

First your characterization is BS. I suggest you read all my posts.

Let me give you some guard rails. For a year i was involved with a sabra who spent 3 years in the IDF and who now lives on a kibbutz outside Tel Aviv. We spent most of our time between Eilat amd Tel Aviv. Prior to that i was married to a jewish woman whose parents were sabra. Prior to that i dated a woman for several years whose parents lost their families to the holocaust. Between all the connections i know Israel pretty well.

My best friend from college went to Tel Aviv for a vacation and met a woman w three daughters who was a widow bcs her husband. was killed in a police action. Her brother was head of security for El Al among other things.

My opinions are based on fact even if sometimes debatable as to my conclusions. My wish is for Peace for Israel and that requires peace with the Palestinians, Israel wants all the land. Always has. The Palestinians want the land that was to be theirs when the State was born. The sabra generation. Leaders like Moshe Dayan were for taking it all back then. For the last 30 years the rhetoric in the public arena had moved more and more to the right. Bengie is not held in great respect if that high. He has been very open about wanting all the land and evicting the Palestinians as have several close associates. Openly expressing what had not been voiced before.

Israel is currently giving Hamas what it wants in its assault on Palestinians. Peace will not be the end product. Nor is the goal but it needs to be. Back in 1770s the USA rebelled agsinst England because of a tax and less.

Palestinians have never been equals in Israel. It is now an apartheid state. It needs a two state solution but Bengie has ruled that out. Then he has a motive to keep the war going. The jewish population will never agree to a democracy where they are in a minority. It will require a negotiation recognizing the legitimate claims of each. Israel was born out of terrorism. So was Hamas. Bengie directed money to support Hamas

Tell me about Truah,

[Baducchi]

You speak repeatedly about Israel and the Israelis, how they are not worthy of trust, that they are an extremely difficult, if not impossible, partner to work with. Do you lay any blame on the Palestinians?

... Israel wants all the land...

I think you answered my question. Paragraph after paragraph, criticism after criticism, and not an ounce of blame to the Palestinians. Plenty for Israel. Not a word for the Palestine. The usual...

[Baducchi]

... murdered the Israeli Olympic athletes in 1972... My mind was made up early on re which side of the struggle I would support.

There are many for me including Munich but, for whatever reason, the Ramallah Lynchings really struck a chord for me. The number of Jews killed doesn't compare to other incidents but it was the details. That it was happening in a police station, that the murderer was deriving so much pleasure from the killings, and, probably the worst part, the sheer number of Palestinians outside the window who were celebrating the blood on his hands. Israeli soldiers I understand. What I saw in Ramallah I do not. Thankfully.

[jhu72]

My earliest recollection of anything having to do with Palestinians (and it was more than enough for me) was when the Black Sept Group murdered the Israeli Olympic athletes in 1972. I'm surprised no one has brought this up and if they have, apologies. Those murders were nothing compared to Oct 7 but at the time absolutely horrific. My mind was made up early on re which side of the struggle I would support.

... me too, until I started to research the history. I am guessing you never heard of the Deir Yassin massacre. Since the late 1800s period each side has been taking eyes for eyes, with the number of eyes taken at one time ever increasing. Many more Palestinian eyes have been taken since 1948.